Wf)t  Htbrarp 

ofttje 

Umber£ttp  of  J?orti)  Carolina 


Collection  of  Motti)  Caroltmana 

Cnbobjeb  bp 

HFofcn  g>prunt  W\\  '- 

of  the  Class  of  1889 


-■W.mkfrr 


4- 


This  book  must  not 
be  taken  from  the 
Library  building. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2012  with  funding  from 

University  of  North  Carolina  at  Chapel  Hill 


http://archive.org/details/riseofcottonmillmitchell 


X31      3 


THE  RISE  OF  COTTON    MILLS  IN   THE  SOUTH 


SERIES  XXXIX  NO.  2 

JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY  STUDIES 

IN 

Historical  and  Political  Science 

Under  the  Direction  of  the 

Departments  of  History,  Political  Economy,  and 
Political  Science 


THE  RISE   OF  COTTON   MILLS  IN 
THE  SOUTH 


BY 


BROADUS  MITCHELL,  PH.D. 

Instructor  in  Political  Economy 


BALTIMORE 
THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS 


Copyright  1921 
THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS 


MESS  OF 

THE  NEW  ERA  PRINTINQ  COMPANY 
LANCASTER,  PA. 


CONTENTS 


Pagi 

Preface vii 

Chapter      I.    The  Background    9 

Chapter    II.    The  Rise  of  the  Mills 77 

Chapter  III.     The  Labor  Factor 160 

Chapter  IV.    The  Role  of  Capital  232 


0- 


PREFACE 


In  prefacing  some  observations  on  the  history  of  the  South 
a  writer  has  said:  "It  will  be  something  if  these  papers 
shall  make  it  plain  that  my  subject  is  a  true  body  of  human 
life — a  thing,  and  not  a  mass  of  facts,  a  topic  in  political 
science,  an  object  lesson  in  large  moralities.  To  know  the 
thing  itself  should  be  our  study ;  and  the  right  study  of  it  is 
thought  and  passion,  not  research  alone."1  The  same  is  true 
of  the  present  story  of  the  South's  espousal  of  manufactures 
in  place  of  whole  devotion  to  agriculture.  Rightly  set  forth, 
it  is  not  only  an  industrial  chronicle,  but  a  romance,  a  drama 
as  well.  One  who  himself  bore  a  part  in  the  events  here 
described,  at  the  outset  of  my  project  hoped  that  I  would 
grasp  both  the  economic  and  the  spiritual  aspects  of  the 
period  under  review.2  This  I  have  tried  to  transmit  to  the 
reader,  and  I  have  found  that  the  fuller  the  account  of  ma- 
terial circumstance,  just  so  much  the  clearer  becomes  the 
spiritual  significance. 

In  point  of  view  I  owe  most  to  my  Father,  accepting  his 
concise  explanation  that  the  South  was  overcome  at  Appo- 
mattox because  it  placed  itself  in  opposition  to  the  compell- 
ing forces  of  the  age — by  agency  of  the  invention  of  the 
cotton  gin  held  to  slavery  instead  of  liberty,  insisted  upon 
States'  rights  in  place  of  nationality,  and  chose  agriculture 
alone  rather  than  embracing  the  rising  industrialism.  As 
a  result,  the  task  since  1865  has  been  to  liberalize  the  South 
in  thought,  nationalize  it  in  politics,  and  industrialize  it  in 
production.  "  Would  we  make  cotton  king  ?  Let  us  aspire 
to  spin  every  fibre  of  our  exhaustless  fields.  By  such  align- 
ments with  this  wondrous  mother-age,  we  shall  enable  the 
South  to  take  her  rightful  part  in  determining  the  national 

iWilliam  Garrott  Brown,  The  Lower  South  in.  American  History. 
2  Mr.  J.  C.  Hemphill. 


Vlll  THE  RISE  OF   COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH 

destiny.''3  My  study  is  little  more  than  illustration  of  this 
analysis  of  the  past,  this  interpretation  of  the  present  and 
future. 

Formerly,  a  landed  aristocracy  shut  out  the  average  man 
from  economic  participation ;  but  with  the  rise  of  cotton 
mills,  the  poor  whites  were  welcomed  back  into  the  service 
of  the  South.  As  a  conclusion  from  my  survey  I  cannot  but 
express  the  anxiety  that  through  lessons  of  the  old  mistake 
we  shall  avoid  the  new  error,  insuring  that  an  aristocracy 
of  capital  shall  not  now  preclude  industrial  democracy. 

My  purpose  has  been  to  describe  the  birth  of  the  industry 
in  the  South  rather  than  its  development.  In  only  a  small 
number  of  instances  has  this  pian~been  departed  from; 
many  topics  rich  in  interest  have  not  been  broached. 

I  regret  that  two  books  did  not  come  into  my  hands  in 
time  to  be  used  in  this  study.  Holland  Thompson's  "  The 
New  South,"  and  George  T.  Winston's  "A  Builder  of  the 
New  South'"  (the  story  of  the  life  work  of  D.  A.  Tomp- 
kins), are  contributions  which  will!  be  found  valuable. 

I  owe  thanks  for  special  assistance  to  Professor  Jacob  H. 
Hollander  and  Professor  George  E.  Barnett,  of  The  Johns 
Hopkins  University,  who  guided  the  investigation;  the  pro- 
prietors of  the  Manufacturers'  Record,  who  permitted  me 
to  use  the  early  files  of  the  paper;  Mr.  T.  S.  Raworth,  of 
Augusta;  Mr.  William  M.  Bird,  of  Charleston;  Professor 
Yates  Snowden  and  Mr.  August  Kohn,  of  Columbia,  all  of 
whom  made  documentary  material  available  to  me.  Others 
have  given  me  hardly  less  generously  of  their  time  and 
thought;  footnote  references  to  interviews  and  correspond- 
ence with  these  must  serve  as  acknowledgment  in  each  case. 

B.  M. 

3  Samuel  Chiles  Mitchell,  "  Educational  Needs  of  the  South,"  in 
The  Outlook,  N.  Y.,  vol.  lxxvi,  no.  7,  p.  415  ff. 


THE  RISE  OF  COTTON  MILLS  IN  THE  SOUTH 


CHAPTER  I 


The  Background 


This  opening  chapter  undertakes  a  brief  survey  of  the 
historical  and  economic  background  out  of  which  the  cotton 
manufacturing  industry  of  the  South,  as  a  distinct  develop- 
ment, emerged.  It  may  be  said  that  thus  to  begin  the  story 
of  the  rise  of  the  mills  with  discussion  of  a  period  which 
lies  a  century  in  advance,  is  not  unlike  the  production  of  a 
play  hopeful  in  conception,  robust  in  theme  and  rapid  in 
action,  but  in  which  the  curtain  first  lifts  to  show  a  stage 
which,  except  for  a  few  unrelated  characters,  remains  empty 
throughout  an  entire  act. 

It  is  a  purpose  here  to  refer  to  the  views  of  some  observers 
who  believe  they  have  caught  glimpses  of  men  and  facts  in 
these  prior  years  not  only  presaging  but  causally  related  to 
the  main  action  later.  The  total  of  this  chapter  will  show, 
however,  that  the  development,  as  such,  first  substantially 
showed  itself  and  had  its  complete  genesis  about  the  year 
1880. 

In  the  neglect  of  Southern  economic  history,  information 
of  the  early  period  is  not  abundant,  yet  there  is  less  dispute 
as  to  findings  of  fact  than  as  to  right  interpretation  of  ma- 
terial evidences  agreed  upon.  In  bringing  the  several  beliefs 
into  parallel  presentation  it  will  be  seen  that  concerning  the 
rise  of  cotton  mills  in  the  South  a  little  body  of  theory  ex- 
ists. Several  of  the  statements  that  will  be  given  are  not 
well-informed,  and  others  are  almost  too  studied,  so  that 
they  lose  perspective.  Interpretations  will  be  cited  in  con- 
nection with  the  different  stages  under  discussion,  so  that 
the  relative  weighting  of  these  stages,  as  intended  by  writers, 
will  appear. 


IO  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS  IN   THE   SOUTH       [i  l6 

It  is  first  useful  to  notice  the  limits  of  divergence  of 
views.  One  who  wrote  with  empirical  purpose  and  may  be 
believed  to  have  been  not  deeply  interested  in  the  historical 
setting  of  the  mills,  has  said  of  one  State,  taken  by  him  as 
typical :  "  The  story  of  the  development  of  the  cotton  manu- 
facturing industry  in  South  Carolina  is  not  wanting  in  im- 
pressive elements.  From  the  beginning  in  1790  till  1900  it 
was  a  struggle  of  gradually  increasing  intensity  and  exten- 
sion."1 This  conception  of  continuity  is  in  marked  contrast 
with  a  representative  expression  of  another  Southerner 
likewise  for  some  time  a  resident  of  the  North.  After  re- 
ferring to  promising  industrial  beginnings  it  is  declared 
that :  "...  a  manufacturing  development  throughout  the 
Piedmont  region  of  the  South  might  have  continued  parallel 
with  that  which  has  taken  place  in  Pennsylvania,  except  for 
the  .  .  .  combined  influence  of  the  invention  of  the  cotton 
gin,  the  institution  of  slavery,  and  the  checking  of  .  .  .  im- 
migration. As  late  as  1810  the  manufactured  products  of 
Virginia,  the  Carolinas  and  Georgia  exceeded  in  value  those 
of  the  entire  New  England  states.  By  Whitney's  invention 
.  .  .  cotton  planting  became  so  profitable,  that  for  a  period 
of  forty  years  the  price  remained  above  twenty>five  cents 
a  puuiuJL — Par^oTie^wereabandoned.  ...  As  cotton  and 
slavery  advanced,  the  population  of  free  white  work  people 
were  driven  further  and  further  into  the  mountain  country, 
and  thus  many  of  the  white  industrial  workers  of  1800  be- 
came the  poor  mountain  farmers  of  1850  .  .  .  the  owners 
of  factories  who  operated  with  free  white  labor  in  1800 
had  become  in  1850  the  cotton  planters  operating  with 
black  slave  labor.  .  .  .  When  the  abolition  of  slavery  re- 
moved one  great  difficulty  of  industries  and  the  white  peo- 
ple who  had  formerly  deserted  manufactures  for  agriculture 
went  back  to  the  pursuits  of  their  fathers,  these  mountain- 
eers formed  the  labor  supply."2 

1  P.  H.  Goldsmith,  The  Cotton  Mill  South,  p.  4. 

2  D.  A.  Tompkins,  in  The  South  in  the  Building  of  the  Nation, 
vol.  ii,  p.  58.  For  a  more  summary  statement,  cf.  ibid.,  Cotton  Mill, 
Commercial  Features,  pp.  108-109.    Cf.  also  ibid.,  History  of  Meek- 

/ 


117]  THE   BACKGROUND  II 

Not  so  categorical  as  one  opinion  that  "  from  1810  to 
1880  the  South  was  industrially  a  desert  of  Sahara,"  this 
view  still  makes  it  clear  that  from  a  point  early  in  the  cen- 
tury until  a  date  subsequent  to  the  Civil  War,  absorption  in 
cotton  culture  threw  manufacturing  of  all  sorts  into  the 
discard. 

There  is  sufficient  evidence  that  in  what  may  be  roughly 
called  the  Revolutionary  Period,  the  South  was  well  started 
toward  a  balanced  economic  development,  with  manu- 
factures as  well  as  agriculture.3  In  South  Carolina  early 
encouragement  was  given  to  the  manufacture  of  cotton  spe- 
cifically ;  one  Hugh  Templeton,  seeking  inventor's  privileges, 
in  1789  deposited  with  State  authorities  a  plan  for  a  carding 
machine  and  "  a  complete  draft  of  a  spinning  machine,  with 
eighty-four  spindles,  that  will  spin  with  one  man's  attendh 
ance  ten  pounds  of  good  cotton  yarn  per  day."4  In  1795  the 
legislature  authorized  commissioners  to  project  a  lottery 
for  the  benefit  of  William  McClure  in  his  effort  to  establish 
a  cotton  manufactory  to  make  "  Manchester  wares."5    The 

lenburg  County,  vol.  i,  pp.  133-137;  The  Tariff  and  Reciprocity; 
Road  Building  and  Repairs,  p.  24;  W.  L.  Trenholm,  The  Southern 
States,  quoted  in  C.  D.  Wright,  Industrial  Evolution  of  the  United 
States,  pp.  145-146;  J.  A.  B.  Scherer,  Cotton  as  a  World  Power,  p. 
168  ff.;  Walter  H.  Page,  The  Rebuilding  of  Old  Commonwealths, 

P-  139. 

3  "  Upon  the  whole,  the  last  half  of  the  Eighteenth  century,  before 
the  influence  of  the  cotton  gin  and  Arkwright's  inventions  were  fully 
felt  in  the  South,  was  a  period  when  agriculture  yielded  some  ground 
in  primary  manufactures  and  household  industries."  (V.  S.  Clark,  in 
South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  p.  308).  Cf.  Tompkins,  The 
South's  Position  in  American  Affairs,  p.  1.  Of  North  Carolina  a 
careful  student  has  said :  "  Though  there  were  no  towns  of  any  size, 
the  number  and  skill  of  the  artisans  was  such  that,  in  1800,  it  seemed 
probable  that  the  logical  development  would  be  into  a  frugal  manu- 
facturing community,  rather  than  into  an  agricultural  state"  (Hol- 
land Thompson,  From  the  Cotton  Field  to  the  Cotton  Mill,  p.  25). 
See,  especially  with  reference  to  iron  making  in  this  period,  Richard 
H.  Edmonds,  Facts  About  the  South  (ed.  1894),  p.  3  ff .  There  is 
importance  in  the  founding  of  the  Manumission  Society,  with  1600 
active  members  as  late  as  1826  (ibid.,  pp.  26-27). 

4  August  Kohn,  The  Cotton  Mills  of  South  Carolina,  pp.  10-11. 

5  Ibid.,  pp.  9-10.  In  an  appropriation  bill  of  1809,  the  sum  of 
$1000  was  advanced  to  Ephraim  McBride  "  to  enable  him  to  con- 
struct a  spinning  machine  on  the  principles  mentioned  in  a  patent 
he  holds  from  the  United  States"  (ibid.,  pp.  10-11).    In  the  same 


12  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH       [ll8 

South  shared  in  the  national  impulse  toward  economic  self 
sufficiency  consequent  upon  the  stoppage  of  colonial  com- 
merce with  England  and  the  Revolution.  Proceedings- of. 
(the.  Safety  Committee  in  Chowan  County,.  North  Carolina, 
for  March  4,  1775,  show  that  "the  committee  met  at  the 
house  of  Captain  James  Sumner  and  the  gentlemen  ap~ 
pointed  at  a  former  meeting  of  directors  to  promote  sub- 
scriptions for  the  encouragement  of  manufactures,  informed 
the  committee  that  the  sum  of  eighty  pounds  sterling  was 
subscribed  by  the  inhabitants  of  this  county  for  that  laud- 
able purpose."  The  chairman  offered  ten  pounds  to  the 
first  producer  in  a  certain  time  of  fulled  woolen  cloth.  The 
provincial  congress  took  steps  the  same  year  to  stimulate, 
by  bounties,  the  manufacture  of  gunpowder,  rolling  and 
slitting  mill  products,  cotton  cards,  steel,  paper,  woolen 
cloth  and  pig  iron.6 

Although  their  objects  were  possibly  political  as  well  as 
industrial,  mechanics''  societies  existed  at  Charleston  and 
Augusta  before  and  about  the  year  1810;  in  Augusta  were 
made  some  of  the  earliest  attempts  in  this  country  to  im- 
prove the  steam  engine.7  As  early  as  1770  there  was  formed 
in  South  Carolina  a  committee  to  establish  and  promote 
manufactures,  with  Henry  Laurens  as  chairman.8  The  pur- 
chase by  Southern  States  of  the  patent  rights  of  Whitney's 
cotton  gin  is  to  be  interpreted  not  as  a  design  to  leave  off 
cotton  manufacturing,  but  rather  as  evidence  of  a  prevalent 
spirit  for  mechanical  improvement. 

Glimpses  at  individual  establishments  show  the  textile 
industry  of  the  South  in  this  Revolutionary  Period  to  have 

year  the  request  of  the  president  of  the  Homespun  Company  of 
South  Carolina  for  a  loan  on  account  of  a  patent  was  unfavorably 
received  by  a  legislative  committee,  but  it  was  recommended  that  he 
be  allowed  until  the  next  meeting  of  the  legislature  "to  report  on 
the  utility  of  the  machine  called  the  Columbia  Spinster,  so  as  to 
entitle,  in  case  the  same  be  approved,  the  inventor  of  the  same  to 
the  sum  provided  by  law  for  his  benefit"  (ibid.,  p.  n).  Cf.  ibid., 
pp.  n-13. 

6  For  these  facts  the  writer  is  indebted  to  a  MS.  of  M.  R.  Pleas- 
ants, "  Manufacturing  in  North  Carolina  before  i860." 

7  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  p.  310. 

8  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  South  Carolina,  p.  7. 


II9]  THE   BACKGROUND  13 

been  generally  of  the  domestic  character.  Manufacturing 
was  conducted  by  individuals  rather  than  corporations,  and 
was  usually  directly  connected  with  plantations.  Daniel 
Hey  ward,  a  planter,  in  a  letter  in  1777,  declared  with  refer- 
ence to  his  "  manufactory "  that  if  cards  were  to  be  had 
"there  is  not  the  least  doubt  but  that  we  could  make  six 
thousand  yards  of  good  cloth  in  the  year  from  the  time  we 
began."9  Domestic  production  is  clearly  seen  in  a  statement 
the  same  year  that  a  planter  in  three  months  trained  thirty 
negroes  to  make  one  hundred  and  twenty  yards  of  cotton 
and  woolen  cloth  per  week,  employing  a  white  woman  to 
instruct  in  spinning  and  a  white  man  in  weaving,  and  it  was 
said :  "  He  expects  to  have  it  in  his  power  not  only  to  clothe 
his  own  negroes,  but  soon  to  supply  his  neighbors."10 

A  few  plants  may  have  approached  a  commercial  char- 
acter. In  1790  it  was  related  that  "a  gentleman  of  great 
mechanical  knowledge  and  instructed  in  most  of  the 
branches  of  cotton  manufactures  in  Europe,  has  already 
fixed,  completed  and  now  at  work  on  the  high  hills  of  the 
Santee,  near  Stateburg,  and  which  go  by  water,  ginning  (  ?) 
carding  and  slubbing  machines,  with  84  spindles  each,  and 
several  other  useful  implements  for  manufacturing  every 
necessary  article  in  cotton."  This  establishment  was  coin- 
cident with  Slater's  famous  factory  at  Pawtucket,  Rhode 
Island,  founded  in  1790,  and  may  have  antedated  it,  though 
comparative  credit  to  the  Stateburg  enterprise  is  perhaps 
diminished  by  information  that  while  some  long  staple  cot- 
ton was  imported  from'  the  West  Indies,  and  a  variety  of 
goods  were  made,  it  was  conducted  as  an  adjunct  to  a  plan- 
tation, parts  of  its  equipment  were  later  removed  to  and 
set  up  on  another  plantation,  and  much  of  its  yarn  was  spun 
for  persons  in  the  vicinity.  It  is  notable,  however,  that  the 
machinery  was  made  in  North  Carolina.11 

9  Ibid.,  p.  7. 

10  South  Carolina  and  American  General  Gazette,  Jan.  30,  1770, 
quoted  in  ibid.,  p.  7.     Cf.  ibid.,  pp.  6-7. 

11  American  Museum,  viii,  Appendix  iv,  part  2,  July  1,  1790,  cited 
in  ibid.,  p.  8.  The  question  mark  is  Mr.  Kohn's.  If  Mr.  Kohn  is 
correct  in  believing  that  "  a  regular  cotton  mill "  was  established  by 


14  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON   MILLS  IN   THE  SOUTH       [l20 

The  textile  industry  in  the  South  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
eighteenth  and  earlier  part  of  the  nineteenth  centuries  was 
stamped  with  the  hallmark  of  domestic  production.12  How- 
ever, it  is  to  be  remembered  that  a  century  and  a  half  ago 
this  and  other  manufactures  in  every  part  of  America  and 
in  England  too  bore  very  much  of  the  domestic  character,13 
and  that  probably  Southern  States  showed  instances  of 
power-driven  machinery  before  Slater  set  up  the  first  Ark- 
wright  mlill  in  Rhode  Island.  The  South  had  planter- 
manufacturers  it  is  true,  but  this  link  between  agriculture 
and  industry  as  contrasted  with  New  England  is  easily  ex- 
plained in  the  more  general  fertility  of  the  soil  and  the 
effect  this  of  course  had  upon  the  occupation  of  the  people. 
Furthermore,  <t?he  very  fact  of  this  coupling  indicates  the 
inclination  toward  economic  balance  and  the  promise  in 
these  years  of  a  rational  development.14 

Mrs.  Ramage,  a  widow,  on  James  Island,  Charleston  District,  in 
1778,  the  fact  is  highly  interesting,  because  the  date  is  nine  years 
antecedent  to  that  of  America's  "first  factory,"  at  Beverly,  Massa- 
chusetts. The  South  Carolina  mill  was  operated  by  mule  power; 
no  traces  survive  (ibid.,  p.  8.  Reference  is  particularly  to  the  City 
Gazette  and  Daily  Advertiser,  Charleston,  Jan.  24,  1779). 

12  Referring  especially  to  the  establishments  just  noticed  and  to 
water-driven  spindles  near  Fayetteville,  Mr.  Clark  has  said :  "  Small 
mills  may  have  started  in  the  Carolinas  and  Georgia,  and  after  a 
brief  infancy  have  vanished  and  left  no  name;  but,  if  so,  the  fact 
is  curious  rather  than  significant,  for  it  had  no  relation  to  the  subse- 
quent history  of  the  industry"  (History  of  Manufactures  in  the 
United  States,  1607-1860,  p.  537).  As  indicating  further  the  lack  of 
causation  in  these  ventures,  it  is  observed :  "  Maryland  is  hardly 
typical  industrially  of  the  Southern  states.  Its  factories  date  from 
the  Revolution  .  .  ."  (ibid.,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v, 
pp.  328-329).  "...  prior  to  the  war  of  1812  the  advance  of  South- 
ern manufactures  was  principally  in  what  were  then  household  arts 
— those  that  produced  for  the  subsistence  of  the  family  rather  than 
for  an  outside  market.  These  manufactures  continued  generalized 
and  dispersed  rather  than  specialized  and  integrated"  (ibid.,  p.  312). 
Cf.  ibid.,  p.  310,  and  W.  W.  Sellers,  A  History  of  Marion  County, 
p.  26. 

13  Carroll  D.  Wright,  "  The  Factory  System  of  the  United  States," 
p.  6,  in  U.  S.  Census  of  Manfactures,  1880. 

14  The  Bolton  Factory  was  built  in  181 1  on  Upton  Creek,  Wilkes 
County,  Ga.  In  1794  on  this  site  had  been  erected  one  of  Whitney's 
first  cotton  gins,  propelled  by  the  water  power  that  later  ran  the 
cotton  mill.  It  is  said  that  Lyon  here  conceived  important  improve- 
ments in  the  Whitney  invention,  making  a  saw  gin  (Southern  Cotton 
Spinners'   Association,  proceedings,   seventh   annual   convention,   p. 


I2l]  THE   BACKGROUND  1 5 

The  nature  of  the  mills  up  to  1810,  then,  is  clear.  Com- 
ing now  to  those  established  in  decades  just  following,  a 
subject  is  entered  in  which  some  controversy  is  involved. 
These  plants1  I  have  chosen  to  call  the  "old  mills/'  A 
distinction  is  to  be  observed  between  influence  of  these  fac- 
tories upon  the  later  great  development  and  the  proper 
character  to  be  ascribed  to  them  as  of  themselves.  A  manu- 
facture which  is  forerunner  in  time  is  not  necessarily  ante- 
cedent in  effect.  To  substantiate  a  view  that  the  Civil  War 
interrupted  a  course  which  was  clearly  laid  down  in  years 
previous,  it  ought  to  be  demonstrable  that  the  old  mills  had 
essentially  the  same  features  as  those  of  the  later  develop- 
ment, with  only  those  lacks  which  were  inherent  in  an  in- 
dustry in  formative  stage.15  The  South  had  small  cotton 
farmers  of  a  prevalent  sort  before  ever  Knapp  taught  effi- 
cient production.  If  the  old  mills  were  of  a  notably  different 
stripe  from  those  of  the  period  fifteen  years  after  the  War, 
the  genesis  of  the  industry,  economically  speaking,  lies  in 

41  ff.).  Here  is  a  suggestion  of  the  fact  that  the  South  was  on  the 
right  road — a  gin,  so  far  from  diverting  attention  entirely  to  the 
cultivation  of  the  staple,  was  succeeded  by  a  cotton  mill  on  the  same 
spot,  operated  by  the  same  power.  Perhaps  Helper  was  in  bounds 
when  the  declared :  "  Had  the  Southern  States,  in  accordance  with 
the  principles  enunciated  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  abol- 
ished slavery  at  the  same  time  the  Northern  States  abolished  it, 
there  would  have  been,  long  since,  and  most  assuredly  at  this  mo- 
ment, a  larger,  wealthier,  wiser,  and  more  powerful  population, 
south  of  Mason  and  Dixon's  line,  than  there  now  is  north  of  it" 
(H.  R.  Helper,  The  Impending  Crisis  of  the  South,  ed.  i860,  pp. 
161-162) . 

15  A  North  Carolinian  of  post-bellum  experience,  but  who  has 
been  identified  with  one  of  the  foremost  industrial  communities  of 
the  South,  thought  it  had  been  "a  clear  case  of  arrested  develop- 
ment ;  it  would  have  all  come  sooner,  but  for  the  War.  It  might  be 
said  that  had  slavery  continued,  manufacturing  would  never  have 
come  in  the  South,  but  it  is  also  true  that  slavery  was  doomed. 
There  is  no  use  in  talking  about  what  might  not  have  happened  had 
slavery  continued"  (W.  F.  Marshall,  interview,  Raleigh,  N.  C, 
Sept.  16,  1916).  Loose,  unsupported  statements  are  frequent:  "The 
first  cotton  mill  ...  in  North  Carolina  was  built  at  Lincolnton  in 
1813  by  Michael  Schenck.  .  .  .  This  mill  was  the  forerunner  of  that 
remarkable  industrial  development  which  has  taken  place  in  North 
Carolina  since  that  time"  (Pleasants  MS.). 


l6  THE  RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS  IN   THE  SOUTH       £l22 

the  later  date.  The  mere  fact  that  the  old  mills  were  known 
to  the  later  builders  is  hardly  enough.16 

Not  a  few  plants  in  the  South  have  been  in  continuous 
operation  since  an  early  date.  But  this  does  not  mean  that 
many  of  these,  so  far  from  inspiring  the  later  development, 
were  not  themselves  by  its  stimulus  so  greatly  changed  as 
to  be  radically  different  from  their  former  character.17  In 
the  light  of  the  spirit  in  which  mills  were  built  about  1880 
and  the  demonstrated  total  newness  of  the  hands  to  the 
processes  and  even  the  idea  of  textile  manufacture,  it  seems 
unnecessary  to  controvert  an  opinion  that  not  only  did  the 
ante-bellum  factories  furnish  a  starting  point  for  the  later 
development,  but  domestic  weaving  had  accustomed  the 
people  to  the  industry.18 

The  history  of  the  mills  of  the  thirty  years  following  1810 
is    rather   hazy.19     Important   facts,   however,    stand   out. 

;  *  16  "In  the  older  mills,  before  the  War,  the  seed  had  been  planted, 
and  cultivation  was  renewed  after  the  War.  The  ante-bellum  mills 
were  pretty  well  known  throughout  the  country.  The  woolen  mills 
at  Salem,  and  the  cotton  mills  in  Alamance  and  a  few  in  Gastonia 
were  known.  The  fact  that  such  goods  as  '  Alamance '  had  a  name 
already  was  an  advantage"  (John  Nichols,  int.,  Raleigh,  N.  C,  Sept. 
16,  1916).  He  continued  to  speak  of  these  mills  in  close  conjunction 
with  the  names  of  the  families  and  manufacturers  who  owned  them 
— the  personal  factor  stood  out  in  his  mind  more  strongly  than  any 
other. 

17  Mr.  Kohn  believes  that  the  one  with  the  longest  record  is  that 
founded  at  Autun,  near  Pendleton,  S.  C,  in  1838,  by  B.  F.  Sloan, 
Thomas  Sloan,  and  Berry  Benson  (Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  15). 
Cf.  Charlotte  (N.  C.)  News,  Textile  Industrial  Edition,  Feb.,  1917, 
with  reference  to  the  Rocky  Mount  Mill.  One  long-established 
enterprise  fell  under  local  dislike  as  late  as  the  seventies,  a  generous- 
minded  father  being  suceeded  in  the  management  by  reckless  sons; 
the  strength  of  the  personal  factor  was  thus- a  danger-;  in  spite  of 
undiscriminating  statements  that  this  mill  afforded  a  manufacturing 
tradition  to  the  community,  it  really  lost  all  public  character. 

18  Suggested  by  Mr.  Charles  E.  Johnson  in  an  interview,  Raleigh, 
N.  C,  Sept.  16,  1916.  For  a  clear  distinction  between  first  establish- 
ments in  Philadelphia  and  New  England  and  genuine  factory  devel- 
opment, cf.  Wright,  in  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1880,  "  Fac- 
tory System  of  U.  S.,"  p.  6;  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation, 
vol.  v,  p.  319. 

19  For  a  careful  narrative  of  the  establishments  of  the  settlers  who 
moved  into  the  South  from  New  England  about  1816,  with  details 
of  the  factories  of  the  Hills,  Shelden,  Clark,  Bates,  Hutchings, 
Stack,  the  Weavers,  McBee,  Bivings,  etc.,  cf.  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of 
S.  C,  and  The  Water  Powers  of   South  Carolina.    For  those  in 


\ 


I23J  THE    BACKGROUND  1 7 

There  was  little  localization  of  the  industry.  There  was  a 
good  deal  of  moving  about  from  one  water-power  to  an- 
other, the  machinery  being  hauled  from  place  to  place  with 
apparent  convenience.2?-  A  founder  would  sell  an  enter- 
prise, build  another  and  sell  it  and  build  a  third.21  It  was 
difficult  to  convey  machinery  to  the  factory  when  purchased 
at  a  distance.22  Much  machinery  was  made  in  local  black- 
smith shops,  and  must  have  been  crude  even  for  that 
period.2!  While  elaboration  of  the  point  falls  elsewhere,  it 
is  worth  notice  here  that  there  is  a  difference  between  the 
old  and  the  later  mills  in  the  character  of  their  promoters 
and  managers.  In  the  earlier  period  .men  came  to  cotton 
manufacturing  in  the  South  by  more  normal  channels  than 
at  the  outset  of  the  subsequent  development.  Like  Michael 
Schenck,  they  had  foreign  industrial  habits  and  traditions 
back  of  them,  and  they  set  up  mills  in  communities  popu- 
lated by  Swiss,  Scotch-Irish  and  Germans.  Or  like  William 
Bates  and  probably  the  Hills,  Clark,  Henry,  and  the  Weav- 
ers, they  came  from  the  industrial  atmosphere  of  New  Eng- 
land, then  particularly  stimulated  by  the  encouragement  lent 
to  textile  manufacturing  by  the  embargo  laid  on  English 
goods  by  the  War  of  1812.24 

Or  through  collateral  business  connections  or  marriage 
they  were  brought  into  the  business.  Simply  private  invest- 
North  Carolina,  Holland  Thompson  is  useful;  cf.  also  Southern 
Cotton  Spinners'  Association,  Proceedings  7th  Annual  Convention, 
p.  41  ff.,  and  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  pp. 
301-302.  ,    '  n 

20  Wood  for  the  boiler  of  the  Mount  Hecla  Mills  growing  scarce, 
the  machinery  was  taken  to  Mountain  Island  and  there  run  by  water 
(Thompson,  pp.  48-49). 

21  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  14. 

22  That  for  the  Mount  Hecla  Mills  about  1830  was  shipped  from 
Philadelphia  to  Wilmington,  N.  C,  up  the  Cape  Fear  River  to  Fay- 
etteville,  and  then  across  country  by  wagon  to  Greensboro.  The 
equipment  of  six  or  seven  hundred  spindles  for  the  Hill  factory  in 
Spartanburg  County  fifteen  years  earlier  was  brought  by  wagon 
from  Charleston  (Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  14).  Cf.  Charlotte 
News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917,  with  reference  to  Rocky  Mount  Mill,  and 
Thompson,  p.  45  ff . 

23  The  Bivingsville  mill  (J.  B.  Cleveland,  int.,  Spartanburg,  S.  C, 
Sept.  8,  1916),  and  Shenck  mill  (Thompson,  p.  45  ff.)  are  cases  in 
point.     Cf.  Thompson,  pp.  42-43. 

24  W.  J.  Thackston,  int.,  Greenville,  S.  C,  Sept.  12,  1916. 


1 8  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON   MILLS  IN   THE   SOUTH        [l24 

ment  enlisted  participation  of  men  in  various  callings.  Of 
course  these  same  forces  operated!  afterwards,  but  in  the 
earlier  time  there  was  no  response  to  a  public  enthusiasm 
or  a  social  demand  that  acted  like  a  magnet  in  drawing  into 
the  industry  men  who  otherwise  would  never  have  entered 
it,  certainly  not  as  entrepreneurs. 

A  plant  turning  out  iron  products  was  operated  in  con- 
nection with  the  Schenck  mill.25  Cotton  factories  conjoined 
with  gins  and  saw  mills  are  not  unknown  in  the  South  to- 
day, but  in  whatever  instance  this  occurs  there  is  indicated 
a  lack  of  specialization. 

Perhaps  the  most  striking  confirmation  of  the  view  here 
taken  of  the  restricted  and  semi-domestic  character  of  the 
old  mills  is  found  in  the  facts  relating  to  the  marketing  and 
consumption  of  their  products.  A  commercial  nature  is 
ascribed  to  'the  establishment  of  General  David  R.  Williams 
on  his  plantation  in  Darlington  County,  South  Carolina, 
which  "in  1828  .  .  .  was  turning  his  cotton  crop,  of  200 
bales  annually,  into  what  was  said  to  be  the  best  yarn  in  the 
United  States.  He  marketed  part  of  his  crop  in  New  York 
and  wove  part  of  it  into  negro  cloth  for  home  use,"  and 
twenty  years  later  distant  and  local  demands  were  being 
supplied.  Evidence  hardly  supports  the  suggestion  that  the 
product  of  such  simall  Southern  mills  as  this  "  controlled 
the  Northern  yarn  market."26 

On  the  other  hand,  local  consumption  and  the  link  with 
domestic  industry,  noted  in  the  above  instance,  were  preva- 
lent. How  closely  these  old  mills  were  joined  with  the  coun- 
tryside is  seen  in  the  fact-  that  into  their  coarse,  homely 
fabrics  went  hand-spun  linen  warp.     The  domestic  char- 

25  Ibid. 

26  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  p.  321 ;  cf .  Kohn, 
Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  pp.  18-19,  giving  quotation  from  Columbia 
Telescope.  Contrast,  however,  William  Gregg,  Essays  on  Domestic 
Industry  (1845),  p.  11 :  "Limited  as  our  manufactures  are  in  South- 
Carolina,  we  can  now,  more  than  supply  the  State  with  Coarse  Cot- 
ton Fabrics.  Many  of  the  Fabrics  now  manufactured  here  are 
exported  to  New-York,  and,  for  aught  I  know,  find  their  way  to  the 
East-Indies." 


125]  THE    BACKGROUND  1 9 

acter  was  thus  ingrained.2-?..  The  yarn  of  the  Batesville  Fac- 
tory, before  the  Columbia  and  Greenville  railroad  came  to 
Greenville  about  1852,  passed  current  almost  like  money,  in 
ten  pound  "  bunches '"  covered  with  blue  paper,  and  al- 
though "  mountain  schooners  "  carried  it  sometimes  a  hun- 
dred and  fifty  miles  into  North  Carolina  and  Tennessee,  it 
was  given  in  barter  for  meat  and  rags.28. 

A  banker  intimately  connected  with  the  textile  industry 
in  one  of  the  oldest  industrial  communities  and  a  member 
of  a  family  to  which  many  writers  are  quick  to  point  as 
founders  of  cotton  manufacture  in  the  South  through  con- 

27  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  p.  321.  Of  the 
Rocky  Mount  mill  in  North  Carolina  it  is  said  that  "  For  some  years 
prior  to  and  during  the  Civil  War,  the  mill  was  a  general  supply 
station  for  warps  which  the  women  of  the  South  wove  into  cloth  on 
the  old  hand  looms."  So  beneficial  did  this  prove  during  the  War 
that  a  cavalry  troop  of  Federals  was  sent  up  from  New  Bern  in 
1863  and  burned  the  mill  (Charlotte  News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917).  It 
is  remarked  that  making  only  twelve  to  fifteen  hundred  pounds,  of 
4s  to  12s  daily,  the  mill  could  not  get  a  steady  market  for  its  wares 
(Thompson,  pp.  48-49).  Until  1851  slaves  and  a  few  free  negroes 
were  worked  in  this  mill.  This  distinguishing  difference  between 
the  old  mills  and  those  of  the  later  development,  when  the  labor  of 
negroes  was  far  from  the  thoughts  of  builders  and  managers,  will  be 
dwelt  upon  in  another  place.  The  McDonald  Mill  at  Concord,  during 
the  Civil  War,  dealt  in  barter.  A  gentleman  in  a  nearby  town  said 
he  remembered  as  a  boy  trading  a  load  of  corn  for  yarn  to  be  woven 
by  the  women  at  home  (Theodore  Klutz,  int.,  Salisbury,  N.  C,  Sept. 
1,  1916).  In  1862  the  Confederate  Government  commandeered  the 
Batesville  factory,  in  South  Carolina,  and  took  nearly  all  of  the 
product.  That  portion  allowed  to  private  purchasers  was  always 
sold  by  10  o'clock  in  the  morning  (W.  J.  Thackston,  int.,  Green- 
ville). Of  the  three  small  plants  running  in  Spartanburg  County 
before  the  War,  one  was  on  Tyger  River,  spinning  yarns  on  half  a 
dozen  frames,  and  people  drove  twenty  to  twenty-five  miles  to  the 
door  of  the  mill  for  the  product,  although  it  was  sold,  also,  in  the 
country  stores  (Walter  Montgomery,  int.,  Spartanburg,  S.  C,  Sept. 
5,  1916).  The  first  woolen  mill  of  Francis  Fries  at  Salem,  N.  C, 
had  a  little  fulling  and  dyeing  plant  for  finishing  cloth  woven  by  the 
farmers'  wives  and  daughters  (Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial 
Features,  pp.  183-184).    Cf.  Thompson,  p.  31. 

28  W.  J.  Thackston,  int.,  Greenville.  The  old  mills  were  "  able  to 
barter  for  the  small  quantities  of  local  raw  cotton  which  they  used. 
The  standard  of  exchange,  the  par,  was  one  yard  of  three-yard 
sheeting  for  a  pound  of  raw  cotton,  which  was  a  third  of  a  pound, 
made  into  cloth,  for  a  pound  in  the  raw  state.  But  this  was  a  retail 
and  not  strictly  a  manufacturing  profit"  (John  W.  Fries,  int., 
Winston-Salem,  N.  C,  Aug.  31,  1916). 


> 


20  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS  IN   THE   SOUTH       [l26 

spicuous  participation  in  the  business  since  the  early  thirties, 
said : 

The  mills  built  after  the  war  were  not  the  result  of  pre-bellum 
mills.  This  is  trying  to  ascribe  one  cause  for  a  condition  which 
probably  had  many  causes.  The  industrial  awakening  in  the  South 
was  a  natural  reaction  from  the  War  and  Reconstruction.  Before 
the  War  there  was  first  the  domestic  industry  proper.  Then  came 
such  small'  mills  about  Winston-Salem  as  Cedar  Falls  and  Frank- 
linsville.  These  little  mills  were  themselves,  however,  hardly  more 
than  domestic  manufactures.  When,  after  the  War,  competition 
came  from  the  North  and  from  the  larger  Southern  mills,  the 
little  mills  which  had  operated  before  and  had  survived  the  war 
lost  their  advantage,  which  consisted  in  their  possession  of  the 
local  field.  .  .  .  The  ante-bellum  domestic-factory  system  did  not 
produce  the  post-bellum  mills.29 

It  must  be  obvious  from  foregoing  considerations  that  a 

census  enumeration  of  mills  of  the  period  cannot  show  in- 
ternal characteristics  which  are  all-important.  But  even 
the  census  returns,  counting  one  plant  like  another,  display 
_  the  Southern  industry  at  this  stage  as  being  feeble.  Some 
primary  descriptive  factors  are  lacking  in  the  earliest  re- 
ports of  the  census  which  are  at  all  useful,  but  taking  the 
four  Southern  States  which  were  farthest  advanced  in  the 
year9  1840  and  1850 — Virginia,  North  and  South  Carolina 
and  Georgia — and  comparing  'the  whole  of  the  South  with 
New  England,  the  showing  may  be  summed  uip  thus  :30 

29  John  W.  Fries,  ibid.  It  is  not  to  be  forgotten  that  lack  of  trans- 
portation facilities  necessarily  cramped  the  old  mills,  and  that  this 
operated  also  to  keep  out  competing  product,  but  their  essential 
character  was  independent  of  this  consideration.  The  superior  trend 
of  capital  into  agriculture  limited  ante-bellum  cotton  mills  by  pre- 
venting profitable  extension  of  plant  and  embarrassing  advantageous 
marketing  of  product  which  might  require  some  waiting.  Cf.  Ed- 
ward Ingle,  Southern  Sidelights,  pp.  70-71.  Another  with  a  broad 
view  of  the  history  of  the  industry  was  willing  to  include  the  Gran- 
iteville  enterprise,  about  which  some  controversy  has  clustered,  in 
his  judgment:  "The  cotton  mills  in  the  South  before  the  War  were 
third-rate  affairs.  I  speak  of  Graniteville  and  Batesville  and  such 
plants  as  these.  I  remember  my  mother's  telling  me  that  the  warp 
.  .  .  used  to  be  supplied  by  the  mills  for  use  in  the  homes  of  the 
housewives.  They  were  not  regular  cotton  mills  as  the  plants  of 
later  establishments  have  come  to  be"  (W.  W.  Ball,  int.,  Columbia, 
S.  C,  Jan.  1,  1917).  "The  mills  built  in  the  eighties  were  a  part  of 
a  new  spirit  from  the  ante-bellum  mills.  The  old  mills — Bivings- 
ville,  Valley  Falls,  Crawfordsville,  in  Spartanburg  County — were 
small  and  insignificant  affairs.  They  lived  from  hand  to  mouth " 
(Cleveland,  int.,  Spartanburg). 
»»  *  30  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1900,  "Cotton  Manufactures,"  p. 


127] 


THE    BACKGROUND 


21 


Virginia 

N.  Carolina 

S.  Carolina 

Georgia 

So.  States 

New  England . . 


Census 

Plants 

I84O 

22 

1850 

27 

1840 

25 

1850 

28 

1840 

15 

1850 

18 

I840 

19 

1850 

35 

I84O 

248 

1850 

166* 

1840 

674 

1850 

564 

Capital 


$1,299,020 

1,908,900 

995.300 

1,058,800 

617,450 

857,200 

573,835 

1.736,156 

4,331,078 

7,256,056 

34,931,399 
53,832,430 


Ops. 


I,8l6 

2,963 
1,219 
1,619 
570 
1,119 

779 

2,272 

6,642 

10,043 

46,834 

61,893 


Spin. 


42,262 

47,934 

531,903 

16,353 

42,589 
i8o,9275 

1,497,394 


Bales 
Consump- 
tion 


17,785 

(a)  V 
13,617 

9,929 
20,230 

78,140 

430,603 


Many  single  mills  in  the  South  today  represent  more 
than  the  extent  of  the  whole  industry  in  the  most  forward 
Southern  State  in  1850.31  n 

Some  writers  have  pointed  to  evidences  of  industrial  ac- 
tivity in  the  period  to  1840  as  presaging  the  later  develop- 
ment. A  localizing  tendency  in  the  textile  manufacture 
along  the  fall  line  of  rivers  in  the  decade  following  1830, 
has  'been  called  a  "slow  and  unconscious  development"32 
George  Tucker  in  1843  first  pointed  out  that  slavery  was 
showing  signs  of  decay  from  economic  causes  and  as  a  sys- 
tem would  finally  lapse  of  its  own  accord.33     A  study  of 

54  ff.     (a)  Thompson  gives  700  looms  and  7000  bales  consumed  (p. 
49  ff.     (b)    An  obviously  incomplete  summary. 

31  Cf.  Thompson,  p.  49  ff.  "  The  number  of  small  carding  and 
fulling  mills  and  of  little  water-driven  yarn  factories,  in  this  section 
[the  South]  before  1850,  may  have  approached  the  number  of  textile 
factories  in  the  same  region  today;  .  .  .  but  few  of  these  establish- 
ments became  commercial  producers"  (Clark,  in  South  in  Building 
of  Nation,  vol.  v,  pp.  310-320).  A  map  showing  distribution  of  cot- 
ton spindles  in  1839  indicates  a  good  representation  for  all  the 
Southern  States  except  Mississippi,  Louisiana,  Arkansas  and  Florida, 
as  to  mills  of  small  size,  but  the  localization  both  as  to  plants  and 
spindles  in  New  England  is  marked  (Clark,  History  of  Manufac- 
tures, pp.  533-560).  See  the  whole  section  for  an  excellent  discus- 
sion of  both  historical  and  economic  phases).  "Few  mills  south 
of  Virginia  had  power  looms  prior  to  1840"  (ibid.,  in  South  in 
Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  p.  321).  Notice  omission  of  looms  for 
Southern  States  in  census  returns  referred  to  above. 

32  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  p.  322. 

33  «  Progress  of  the  United  States  in  Population  and  Wealth  in 
Fifty  Years,"  referred  to  by  William  E.  Dodd,  in  South  in  Building 
of  Nation,  vol.  v,  pp.  566-567. 


22  THE    RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        £l28 

North  Carolina  industrial  history  of  the  period  has  led  to 
the  conclusion  that  "  The  people  of  the  state  became  inter- 
ested and  soon  a  class  of  small  manufacturers  .  .  .  came 
into  prominence  and  continued  to  thrive  down  to  i860."34 

It  is  questionable,  however,  whether  it  may  be  truly  said 
that  "  the  people  of  the  state  became  interested  " ;  certainly 
there  wasi  nothing  like  the  sweep  of  public  sentiment  that 
appeared  in  1880,  and  the  suggestions  relied  upon  in  mak- 
ing the  inference  show  as  much  against  as  for  the  likelihood 
of  their  taking  effect.35 

»t  The  foregoing  paragraphs  lead  up  to  a  more  important 
judgment  of  Mr.  Clark  that  "  In  the  South  the  most  strik- 
ing feature  of  this  period  [1840-1860]  was  the  gradual 
breaking  down  of  a  traditional  antipathy  to  manufactures. 
This  hostility  was  opposed  to  the  obvious  interests  of  a 
region  where  idle  white  labor,  abundant  raw  materials,  and 

>t  ever-present  water-power   seemed  to   unite   conditions    so 

'  3i  Pleasants.  Reference  is  had  especially  to  items  in  State  papers 
and  in  Niles'  Register.  The  Tarboro  Free  Press  declared  that 
should  a  tariff  measure  of  the  time  meet  with  success,  the  people  of 
the  Carolinas  would  have  to  "join  in  the  scuffle  for  the  benefit 
anticipated  from  this  new  American  system,  and  they  will  have  to 
bear  a  portion  of  its  burdens  and  buffet  the  Northern  manufacturer 
with  his  own  weapons."  It  is  noticed  that  a  report  to  the  North 
Carolina  legislature  in  the  late  twenties,  looking  back  upon  the  dis- 
integrating process  of  the  preceding  two  decades,  said :  "  There  must 
be  a  change.  But  how  is  this  important  revolution  to  be  accom- 
plished? We  unhesitatingly  answer — by  introducing  the  manufac- 
turing system  into  our  own  state  and  fabricating  at  least  to  the 
extent  of  our  wants.  .  .  .  Our  habits  and  prejudices  are  against 
manufacturing,  but  we  must  yield  to  the  force  of  things  and  profit 
by  the  indications  of  nature.    The  policy  that  resists  the  change  is 

u    unwise  and  suicidal.     Nothing  else  can  restore  us," 

35  With  preemption  of  land  into  large  estates  and  consequent  in- 
jury to  small  farming,  discovery  of  gold,  agitation  for  railroads  and 
improvements  in  cotton  manufacturing  machinery,  the  people  of 
Mecklenburg  County,  North  Carolina,  "  many  years  before  the  war 
were  beginning  to  realize  the  importance  of  diversified  industries. 
.  .  .  An  industrial  crisis  was  imminent,  and  the  problem  would  have 
solved  itself  by  natural  agencies  within  a  few  more  years,  had  not 
sectional  differences  brought  on  the  war"  (Tompkins,  History  of 
Mecklenburg,  vol.  i,  p.  124).  Cf.  ibid.,  pp.  126-127;  Kohn,  Cotton 
Mills  of  S.  C,  pp.  18-19.  That  the  war  did  come  to  render  such  an 
industrial  impulse  impossible  of  effects  shows  the  relative  weakness 
of  the  spirit  at  this  time.  The  preoccupation  with  intersectional  dif- 
ferences was  of  greater  potency  than  the  intrasectional  change  of 
mind,  if  such  there  were. 


I29]  THE    BACKGROUND  2$ 

favorable  to  textile  industries.  Cotton  planting  engaged 
the  labor  and  the  thought  and  capital  of  a  directing  white 
class,  but  the  natural  operative  of  the  South  remained  un- 
employed, and  the  capital  of  the  North  and  of  Europe  was 
mobile  enough  to  flow  to  the  point  of  maximum  profit  with- 
out regard  to  sectional  or  national  lines,  were  such  a  profit 
known  to  be  assured  by  Southern  factories.  Slavery  as  a 
system  probably  had  less  direct  influence  upon  manufactures 
than  is  commonly  supposed,  but  the  presence  of  the  negro 
through  slavery  was  important." 

It  is  frankly  recognized  that  white  immigration  from  Eu- 
rope, which  at  this  time  supplied  the  most  considerable  me- 
chanical skill,  avoided  districts  heavily  populated  with  ne- 
groes ;  that  plantation  self-sufficiency  meant  isolation  with 
small  need  for  good  communicating  roads;  that  the  market 
for  middle-grade  goods  was  restricted  by  the  servile  character 
of  the  colored  inhabitants ;  that  the  credit  system,  by  which 
factors  controlled  the  direotioning  of  productive  capital, 
rested  upon  cotton  culture  by  negro  labor;  that  while  the 
corn  laws  held  in  England,  reciprocity  between  the  South- 
ern States  and  the  mother  country  tended  to  discourage 
manufactures  in  this  section  while  the  conditions  of  com- 
merce favored  manufacture  in  the  North.  "  These  business 
interests,  supported  by  social  traditions  and  political  sec- 
tionalism, were  strengthened  in  their  opposition  to  new 
industries  by  a  widespread  papular  prejudice  against  or- 
ganized manufactures.  .  .  .  Nevertheless  the  South  chafed 
continually  under  the  discomfort  of  an  ill-balanced  system 
of  production.  .  .  ."  Mention  is  made  of  the  canal  at  Au- 
gusta and  of  cotton  mills  at  Charleston,  Mobile,  Columbus, 
New  Orleans  and  Memphis  directly  following  the  writings  to 
and  object  lesson  of  William  Gregg  in  his  Graniteville  fac- 
tory, and  it  is  concluded  that  "modern  cotton  manufactur-  r. 
ing  in  the  South  date9  from  the  founding  of  Graniteville  -x 
rather  than  from  the  post-bellum  period.  .  .  .  However, 
viewed  in  comparison  with  the  cotton  manufactures  of  the 
North,    those   of   the   South   were   still   insignificant.  .  .  .  if 


24  THE    RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [13O 

Nevertheless,  the  present  attainment  of  the  industry  as- 
sured its  definite  future  growth,  and  ultimate  national  im- 
portance."36 

It  is  not  hard  to  justify  disagreement  with  this  view. 
The  basis  of  probable  industrial  development  before  the  War 
appears  in  hindsight  only  if  the  pervasive  numbing  influ- 
ence of  slavery,  made  more  powerful  in  the  last  years 
through  the  frantic  effort  at  its  maintenance  through  exten- 
sion, is  forgotten.  Well  enough  to  assert  that  the  capital  of 
the  North  and  of  Europe  was  mobile  enough  to  flow  across 
the  Atlantic  and  across  Mason  and  Dixon's  line  were  a 
profit  in  manufacture  in  the  South  known  to  be  assured,  but 
the  fact  is  that  capital  did  not  -come  in  for  industrial  pur- 
poses because  bright  prospects  had  not  been  proved,  and 
this  largely  because  home  enterprise  was  a  laggard  while 
slavery  claimed  the  section's  capital  resources  for  cotton 
cultivation.37  It  is  difficult  to  see  the  distinction  which  Mr. 
Clark  desires  to  draw  between  the  effect  of  the  presence  of 
the  negro  and  the  presence  of  slavery.  While  it  is  true  that 
for  long  years  after  emancipation,  and  continuing  to  this 
day,  the  influence  of  the  negro's  presence  in  restraining  in- 
flow of  immigrants  is  evident,  the  lessening  of  this  deterrent 
and  the  removal  of  nearly  equal  drawbacks  could  not  pro- 
ceed or  commence  while  slavery  existed.    From  the  point  of 

"  36  Clark,  History  of  Manufactures,  p.  553  ff.     Cf.  ibid,  in   South 

in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  pp.  213-214,  and  p.  316  ff.     Cf.  Kohn 

(Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  16)  :  "The  real  and  the  lasting  develop- 

1    ,      ment  of  cotton  mills  in  South  Carolina  might  be  started  with  the 

y        Graniteville  Cotton  Mill.  .  .  ."     Cf.   Gregg,  Domestic  Industry,  pp. 

»•  24-25. 

37  "  Cheapness  of  cotton,  abundance  of  water-power,  the  resources 
of  the  coal-fields,  when  steam  began  to  supplant  the  dam,  the  other 
mineral  resources,  and  the  wealth  of  forests  .  .  .  did  not  even  at- 
tract from  other  parts  sufficient  capital  to  develop  the  section  to 
anything  like  its  full  extent.  No  artificial  expedients  were  neces- 
sary there.  But  capital  did  not  come"  (Ingle,  p.  73).  A  propa- 
"  gandist  of  the  early  eighties,  desiring  to  organize  small  cotton  mills 
in  the  South,  quoted  with  approval  a  correspondent  of  the  Morning 
News  of  Savannah,  declaring  that  before  the  War  the  planters  saw 
the  advantage  for  such  establishments  but  were  deterred  from 
manufacturing  because  "  slavery  and  the  factory  were  declared  to  be 
incompatible  institutions.  They  could  not  exist  together "  (W.  H. 
Gannon,  The  Landowners  of  the  South,  and  the  Industrial  Classes 
//    of  the  North,  p.  9  ff.). 


I31]  THE    BACKGROUND  2$ 

view  of  the  independent  white  workman  the  presence  of  the 
negro  in  slavery  held  as  a  far  more  forcible  objection  than 
the  presence  of  the  negro  in  freedom.  His  killing  economic 
competition  and  radiated  social  poison  were  beyond  dispute 
and  beyond  prospect  of  remedy  until  he  was  made  at  least 
a  free  producer.  Any  prospect  of  immigration  for  the 
South  has  taken  its  rise  from  the  Civil  War. 

M  It  was  slavery  that  made  plantation  self-sufficiency  in 
primitive  needs  universal,  that  made  isolation  and  physical 
barriers  to  intercourse.  The  credit  system  in  its  heyday 
rested  in  large  degree  upon  supply  by  the  factor  of  all  in- 
dustrial products,  which  needs  must  be  sustained  so  long 
as  every  local  energy  was  foredoomed  for  absorption  into 

H  cotton  growing. 

It  cannot  rightly  be  said  that  the  traditional  antipathy  to  ', 
manufactures  was  "  opposed  to  the  obvious  interests  of  a 
region  where  idle  white  labor,  abundant  raw  materials,  and 
ever-present  water-power  seemed  to  unite  conditions  so 
favorable  to  textile  industries,"  if  it  is  meant  that  these  in- 
terests, clear  enough  to  us  now,  were  obvious  to  Southern 
consciousness  and  purpose  then.  This  applies  particularly 
to  the  labor  factor.  It  will  be  seen  later  that  in  the  period"! 
before  the  War  the  mills  often  employed  slaves  as  the  ex- 
clusive operatives;  in  some  cases  negroes  were  employed 
with  whites,  and  finally  and  more  importantly,  through  Re- 
construction years  and  at  the  very  outset  of  the  cotton  mill 
era  the  inclination  of  establishers  of  factories  was  frequently 
to  engage  negro  hands  and  to  induce  operatives  to  come 
from  the  North  and  even  from  England  and  the  Continent 
— overlooking  the  native  white  population  as  a  useful  sup- 
ply of  workers  as  though  it  had  not  been  there.  Before  the 
War  the  presence  of  raw  cotton  was  certainly  thought  of 
rather  as  a  guarantee  of  economic  independence  than  as  a 
stimulus  to  produce  within  the  section  those  products  of 
manufacturing  which  the  staple  was  potent  to  purchase  „ 
from  outside. 

It  is  not  implied  that  conspicuous  promulgators  and  ex- 


26  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH  I  32 

emplars  of  the  need  for  a  change  in  economic  activity,  such 
as  William  Gregg  and  some  others,  were  not  products  of  a 
reaction  that  showed  itself  from  the  long  continuance  of 
slavery,  but  they  stand  out,  impotent  as  they  are  striking, 
against  a  dull  and  motionless  background  of  prevalent  sys- 

*   tern.1  They  cried  in  a  wilderness. 

Materials  and  viewpoint  are  both  too  well  understood  to 
require  further  demonstration  of  the  preventive  influence 
which  slavery  and  cotton  had  upon  industry  in  the  South. 
Yet  a  few  observations  of  Southern  men  are  interesting 

h  just  at  this  point.  Henry  Watterson  has  said :  "  The  South ! 
The  South!  It  is  no  problem  at  all.  The  story  of  the  South 
may  be  summed  up  in  a  sentence :  she  was  rich,  she  lost  her 
riches ;  she  was  poor  and  in  bondage ;  she  was  set  free,  and 
she  had  to  go  to  work ;  she  went  to  work,  and  she  is  richer 
than  ever  before.  You  see  it  was  a  groundhog  case.  The 
soil  was  here,  the  climate  was  here,  but  along  with  them  was 
a  curse,  the  curse  of  slavery."38  Probably  not  over-induced 
by  bitter  animus  is  Helper's  direct  charge : 

i,  In  our  opinion,  an  opinion  which  has  been  formed  .  .  .  from  as- 
siduous researches,  .  .  .  the  causes  which  have  impeded  the  progress 
and  prosperity  of  the  South,  which  have  dwindled  our  commerce 
.  .  .  into  the  most  contemptible  insignificance;  sunk  a  large  majority 
of  our  people  in  galling  poverty  and  ignorance,  rendered  a  small 
minority  conceited  and  tyrannical  .  .  . ;  entailed  upon  us  a  humiliat- 
ing dependence  upon  the  Free  States ;  disgraced  us  in  the  recesses  of 
our  own  souls,  and  brought  us  under  reproach  in  the  eyes  of  all 
civilized  and  enlightened  nations — may  all  be  traced  to  one  common 
source,  and  there  find  solution  in  the  most  hateful  and  horrible 
word   that   was    ever   incorporated  into   the   vocabulary   of   human 

r,  economy — Slavery!39 

Tompkins  saw  clearly  and  in  effect  said  again  and  again, 
"  the  result  of  the  introduction  and  growth  of  the  system 
of  slavery  was  revolutionary;  it  turned  the  energies  of  the 
people  almost  wholly  to  the  cultivation  of  cotton ;  it  prac- 
tically destroyed  all  other  industries.  .  .  ."40 

''   38  Quoted  by  A.  B.  Hart,  The  Southern  South,  pp.  231-232. 

39  Helper,  p.  25. 

40  Tompkins,  History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  i,  p.  100.  "  There  were 
no  industries  requiring  skill  or  thought,  and  there  was  no  necessity 
for  scientific  farming  or  anything  else  scientific.  .  .  .  Slavery  not 
only  demonstrated  that  people  will  not  think  unless  it  is  necessary, 


1333  THE   BACKGROUND  2"J 

Not  only  did  slavery  hold  the  South  down  to  supplying 
the  raw  material,  but  while  its  baneful  influence  lasted  few 
improvements  were  made  in  the  methods  or  appliances  even 
for  the  growing  and  preparation  of  cotton  for  the  market. 
As  in  India  and  China  today,  the  cheapness  of  labor  made 
ingenuity,  enterprise  and  machinery  unnecessary.  Except 
in  size  and  superficial  appearance  there  was  no  change  in 
the  ante-bellum  gin,  gin-house  and  screw  from  1820  to  i860. 
But  after  the  War  came  a  feeder,  a  condenser,  a  hand- 
press  in  the  lint  room,  and  cotton  elevators.41 

If  Cotton  was  King,  the  monarch  was  an  imperious  and 

but  also  that  they  will  not  work  unless  it  is  necessary  (ibid.,  pp. 
98-99).  This  statement  is  strongly  influenced  by  Tench  Coxe.  It 
has  been  said  of  the  Irish  people  by  Lord  Dufferin  that  "the  entire 
nation  flung  itself  back  upon  the  land,  with  as  fatal  an  impulse  as 
when  a  river,  whose  current  is  suddenly  impeded,  rolls  back  and 
drowns  the  valley  which  it  once  fertilized."  Sir  Horace  Plunkett 
comments :  "  The  energies,  the  hopes,  nay,  the  very  existence  of  the 
race,  became  thus  intimately  bound  up  with  agriculture"  (Sir 
Horace  Plunkett,  Ireland  in  the  New  Century,  p.  20).  "By  the 
influence  of  the  negro  the  South  lost  its  manufactures  and  largely 
its  commerce,  and  became  practically  a  purely  agricultural  section 
of  the  nation"  (Tompkins,  ibid.,  vol.  ii,  pp.  200-201 ;  cf.  ibid.,  Cotton 
Growing,  pp.  3-4).  As  to  the  usefulness  of  negroes  in  latter-day 
cotton  mills,  this  manufacturer  advised :  "  Dependence  upon  the 
negro  as  a  laborer  has  done  infinite  injury  to  the  South.  In  the 
past  it  brought  about  a  condition  which  drove  the  white  laborer 
from  the  South  or  into  enforced  idleness.  It  is  important  to  rees- 
tablish as  quickly  as  possible  respectability  for  white  labor  "  (ibid., 
Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  pp.  109-110).  Cf.  ibid.,  Building 
and  Loan  Associations,  p.  43 ;  The  Cultivation,  Picking,  Baling  and 
Manufacturing  of  Cotton,  from  the  Southern  Standpoint,  pp.  5-6; 
F.  T.  Carlton,  History  and  Problems  of  Organized  Labor,  pp.  19-20. 
41  "  The  cotton  was  packed  by  hand,  carried  into  the  gin-house 
in  baskets  by  laborers,  carried  to  the  gin  by  laborers,  pushed  into 
the  lint  rooms,  carried  to  the  screw,  packed  in  the  box  of  the  screw 
and  bound  with  ropes,  all  by  hand,"  but  since  the  abolition  of  slavery 
"  all  the  machinery  and  appliances  for  preparing  cotton  for  the  mar- 
ket have  been  revolutionized"  (Tompkins,  Cultivation,  Picking,  etc., 
of  Cotton,  pp.  5-6).  See  others  of  his  writings  for  a  full  discussion 
of  this  point.  Cf.  M.  B.  Hammond,  The  Cotton  Industry,  pp.  77-78, 
and,  for  a  detailed  account  of  bad  preparation  of  cotton  down  to 
1880,  Edward  Atkinson,  in  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1880, 
"  The  Cotton  Manufacture,"  p.  4  ff.  "  No  slave-holding  people  ever 
were  an  inventive  people.  In  a  slave-holding  community  the  upper 
classes  may  become  luxurious  and  polished;  but  never  inventive. 
Whatever  degrades  the  laborer  and  robs  him  of  the  fruits  of  his  toil 
stifles  the  spirit  of  invention  and  forbids  the  utilization  of  inven- 
tions and  discoveries  even  when  made"  (Henry  George,  Progress 
and  Poverty,  twenty-fifth  anniversary  ed.,  p.  523). 


28  THE    RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        ^34 

narrow-minded  tyrant,  who  cramped  the  development  and 
put  blinders  to  the  vision  of  the  country.  Said  William 
Gregg  in  1845 : 

"  Since  the  discovery  that  cotton  would  mature  in  South-Carolina, 
she  has  reaped  a  golden  harvest;  but  it  is  feared  it  has  proved  a 
curse  rather  than  a  blessing,  and  I  believe  that  she  would  at  this  day 
be  in  a  far  better  condition,  had  the  discovery  never  been  made.  .  .  . 
Let  us  begin  at  once,  before  it  is  too  late,  to  bring  about  a  change 
in  our  industrial  pursuit's.  ...  let  croakers  against  enterprise  be 
silenced.  .  .  .  Even  Mr.  Calhoun,  our  great  oracle  ...  is  against  us 
in  this  matter;  he  will  tell  you,  that  no  mechanical  enterprise  can 
succeed  in  South-Carolina  .  .  .  that  to  thrive  in  cotton  spinning,  one 

t    should  go  to  Rhode  Island.  .  .  ,42 

"  The  invention  of  the  cotton  gin,"  wrote  Tompkins, 
"...  before  i860  .  .  .  was  nearer  anything  else  than  a 
blessing.  It  was  primarily  responsible  for  the  system  of 
slavery.  .  .  .  Cotton  ...  in  its  manufacture  ...  is  the  life 
of  the  South,  but  we  could  probably  have  done  as  well  with- 
out it  until  we  began  to  manufacture  it."43 

42  Domestic  Industry,  pp.  18-19. 

43  History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  i,  p.  194.     For  a  careful  descrip- 
"     tion  of  the  circumstances  surrounding  the  invention  of  the  cotton 

gin,  and  the  legal  documents  in  the  dispute  over  the  rights  to  it,  cf. 
ibid.,  Cotton  and  Cotton  Oil,  pp.  19-31,  and  appendix.    "  We  aban- 
doned a  once  leading  factory  system ;  we  imported  slaves ;  we  let  all 
public  highways  become  quagmires;  we  destroyed  every  possibility 
for  the  farmer  except  cotton  and  by  cutthroat  competition  amongst 
ourselves  we  reduced  the  price  to  where  there  was  not  a  living  in 
it  for  the  cotton  producer.    We  made  cotton  in  a  quantity  and  at  a 
t      price   to   clothe   all   the   world   excepting   ourselves"    (ibid.,   Road 
'      Building,  p.  24).    "The  economic  history  of  the  South  from  the 
,/    Revolution  to  the  Civil  War  is  a  record  of  the  development  of  one 
natural  advantage  to  the  neglect  of  several  others.     Fitted  by  nature 
"    to  support  a  large  population  engaged  in  a  variety  of  pursuits  based 
upon  agriculture,  it  had  a  small  population  occupied  in  the  produc- 
tion of  raw  material  that  contributed  to  the  maintenance  of  a  dense 
population  in  regions  where  artifice  contended  against  harsh  climate 
/fand  a  stubborn  soil"  (Ingle,  p.  47).    Cf.  Burkett  and  Poe,  Cotton, 
pp.  312  and  313;  E.  C.  Brooks,  The  Story  of  Cotton,  p.  157;  Thomp- 
son, pp.  44;  Miller  and  Millwright,  quoted  in  Manufacturers'  Record, 
Baltimore,  Feb.  22,  1883.    Gregg  showed  that  cotton,  the  great  god, 
drove  agricultural  enterprise  from   South   Carolina,   for,  with  the 
returns  to  its  cultivation  under  ordinary  management  amounting  to 
only  3  or  4  and  in  some  instances  only  2  per  cent,  the  inclination  for 
planters  to  remove  with  their  slave  capital  to  the  richer  Southwest 
was  strong,  thus  keeping  the  population  of  the  State  at  a  standstill 
— - — {TXom£sticJLridustry!_pJi8) .    "Perhaps  the  most  striking  economic 
change  that  thenew  industry  [cotton  culture]  effected  in  the  South 


1 3  5^]  THE    BACKGROUND  29 

The  old  South  had  much  in  common  with  mercantilist 
feeling.  Though  coin  for  coffers  was  not  precisely  the  aim, 
there  was  the  settled  ambition  for  exportation  of  a  money- 
crop  that  involved  self-exploitation  and  left  no  room  for 
sectional  introspection.  The  economic  system  was  full  of 
inhibitions,  the  all-pervading  effect  of  which  cannot  be  cal- 
culated. In  accounting  in  1856  for  the  stagnation  of  Vir- 
ginia as  compared  with  the  industrial  activity  of  New  Eng- 
land and  Old  England,  Olmsted  wrote : 

It  is  the  old,  fettered,  barbarian  labor-system,  in  connection  with 
**  which  they  [Virginians]  have  been  brought  up,  against  which  all 
their  enterprise  must  struggle,  and  with  the  chains  of  which  all  their 
ambition  must  be  bound.  This  conviction  ...  is  forced  upon  one 
more  strongly  than  it  is  possible  to  make  you  comprehend  by  a  mere 
statement  of  isolated  facts.  You  could  as  well  convey  an  idea  of  the 
effect  of  mist  on  a  landscape,  by  enumerating  the  number  of  particles 
of  vapor  that  obscure  it.44 

Duping  of  the  people  through  charlatan  guidance  of  polit- 
ical leaders  is  too  evident  in  the  South  of  today  to  require 
description  of  its  operation  in  an  earlier  period.45  A  re- 
after  the  reintroduction  of  slavery  was  the  speedy  abandonment  of 
manufactures.  .  .  .  What  was  the  use  of  nerve-racking  investment 
in  elaborate  and  costly  machinery  when  a  land-owner  could  reap 
ten  per  cent  net  profit  from  a  few  negroes  and  mules  and  a  bushel 
or  two  of  the  magical  cotton  seed?  And  yet  the  South  had  unusual 
manufacturing  facilities.  .  .  ."  (Scherer,  p.  168  ff . ;  cf.  ibid.,  pp.  243, 

- ^4J_-lngl£<__pfL_4Q1_i39 ;   New  York  Herald,  quoted  in  News   and 

fc  ^iirierrXhaxleston,  March  9,  1881 ;  F.  L.  Olmsted,  Seaboard  Slave 
rtates,  p.  i^ff).  The  social  difference  between  North  and  South 
before  the  War,  so  often  remarked  as  existing  of  itself  apart,  is 
accounted  for  by  slavery,  which  arrested  development  on  Southern 
soil  of  the  industrial  type  of  American  civilization  (A.  D.  Mayo,  in  ^ 
The  Social  Economist,  Oct.,  1893,  pp.  203-204).  ^^  . 

44  Olmsted,  pp.  140-141,  cf.  ibid.,  p.  185 ;  pp.  213-214.  "The  "*S 
amount  of  it,  then,  is  this:  Improvement  and  progress  in  South 
Carolina  is  forbidden  by  its  present  system"  (ibid.,  pp.  522-523). 
And  for  his  general  philosophy  of  the  subject,  see  ibid.,  pp.  490-491). 
He  took  as  an  average  expression  of  the  views  "  of  the  majority  of 
those  whose  monopoly  of  wealth  and  knowledge  has  a  governing 
influence  on  a  majority  of  the  people,"  the  statement  of  a  newspaper 
in  1854:  ''African  slavery  ...  is  a  thing  that  we  cannot  do  without, 
that  is  righteous,  profitable,  and  permanent,  and  that  belongs  to 
Southern  society  as  inherently,  intricately,  and  durably  as  the  white 
race  itself"   (ibid.,  pp.  298-299). 

45  There  are  many  instances  similar  to  that  of  a  famous  election 
speech  in  Virginia  in  the  fifties,  in  which  the  aspirant  declared  to  his 
audience :   "  Commerce  has  long  ago   spread   her   sails,   and   sailed 


\ 


30  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [136 

flection  as  sorrowful,  however,  as  the  confirmed  bias  of  the 
people  shown  in  applause  to  such  guidance,  is  the  blindness 
of  the  leaders  who,  no  doubt  with  strong  elements  of  trick- 
ery, gave  even  stronger  signs  of  being  themselves  duped  by 
a  situation.  Not  that  the  crowd  was  believing,  but  that 
spokesmen  were  so  largely  sincere,  was  most  melancholy. 
The  drug  had  ceased  to  lead  to  remorse,  and  began  to  bring 
hallucinations.46  Approaches  to  rational  statesmanship  and 
reasonable  moves  toward  balanced  economic  activity,  found 
especially  in  the  border  States,  could  be  nothing  more  than 

away  from  you  .  .  .  you  have  set  no  tilt-hammer  of  Vulcan  to  strike 
blows  worthy  of  the  gods  in  your  iron-foundries;  you  have  not  yet 
spun  more  than  coarse  cotton  enough,  in  the  way  of  manufacture 
to  clothe  your  own  slaves.  .  .  .  You  have  rallied  alone  on  the  single 
power  of  agriculture — and  such  agriculture!  .  .  .  Instead  of  having 
to  feed  cattle  on  a  thousand  hills,  you  have  had  to  chase  the  stump- 
tailed  steer  through  the  sedge-patches  to  procure  a  tough  beef-steak 
(laughter  and  applause).  .  .  .  The  landlord  has  skinned  the  tenant, 
and  the  tenant  has  skinned  the  land,  until  all  have  grown  poor 
together."  "  And  how,"  asks  Olmsted,  "does  the  fiddling  Negro 
propose,  it  will  be  wondered,  to  remedy  this  so  very  amusing  stu- 
pidity, poverty,  and  debility?  Very  simply  and  pleasantly.  By 
building  railroads  and  canals,  ships  and  mills ;  by  establishing  manu- 
factories, opening  mines.  .  .  .  And,  '  Hurrah ! '  shout  the  tickled 
electors  ;  '  that's  exactly  what  we  want' "  And  then  he  showed  that 
it  was  much  like  the  quack  telling  the  confirmed  paralytic  to  live 
generously,  take  vigorous  exercise  and  grow  well;  that  with  the 
disease  of  slavery  in  its  vitals  the  South  could  not  do  else  than 
languish ;  that  in  promising  wholesome  measures  which  contemplated 
everything  but  the  attacking  of  slavery  the  politicians  were  just 
1/  laughing  at  the  people  (Olmsted,  p.  288  ff. ;  cf.  ibid.,  pp.  179-180). 
46  A  passage  of  Sir  Horace  Plunkett  in  comment  upon  Irish  poli- 
tics is  much  to  the  point :  "  Deeply  as  I  have  felt  for  the  past  suffer- 
ings of  the  Irish  people  and  their  heritage  of  disability  and  distress, 
I  could  not  bring  myself  to  believe  that,  where  misgovernment  had 
continued  so  long,  and  in  such  an  immense  variety  of  circumstances 
and  conditions,  the  governors  could  have  been  alone  to  blame.  I 
envied  those  leaders  of  popular  thought  whose  confidence  in  them- 
selves and  in  their  fellows  was  shaken  by  no  such  reflections.  But 
the  more  I  listened  to  them,  the  more  the  conviction  was  borne  in 
upon  me  that  they  were  seeking  to  build  an  impossible  future  upon 
an  imaginary  past"  (Ireland  in  New  Century,  p.  147).  Cf.  Tomp- 
kins, Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  preface  to  appendix,  for  an 
incident  related  of  William  Gregg  and  an  opponent  in  an  election 
campaign,  which,  despite  its  incidental  happening,  shows  aptly  just 
the  point  of  preoccupation  with  politics  to  which  the  Southern  mind 
came,  the  degree  of  trifling  with  which  the  most  sober  proposals 
were  met,  the  hopelessness  of  change  from  this  state  of  affairs  by 
anything  short  of  a  fundamental  moral  awakening. 


I37]  THE   BACKGROUND  3 1 

ineffectual  stirrings  while  slavery  persisted,  and  were  less 
likely  of  success  because  the  last  years  before  the  War,  in 
which  they  emerged,  were  given  over  to  such  passionate, 
defiant  advocacy  of  the  "  Southern  institution."47 

The  deterrent  effect  of  slavery  upon  immigration  has 
been  noticed  above.  In  i860  only  6  iper  cent  of  the  white 
population  of  the  South  was  foreign-born,  but  immigrants 
made  up  nearly  20  per  cent  of  that  of  the  North.  In  the 
decade  1850-1860  the  South's  quota  of  foreign-born  in  the 
whole  country  dropped  from  14  to  13  per  cent.48 

Independent  white  artizans,  so  important  in  the  industrial 
history  of  the  North  in  this  period,  avoided  competition 
with  slave  labor;  if  this  drawback  to  coming  to  the  South 
was  removed  by  their  acquiring  slaves  themselves  where  a 
few  had  the  means,  they  must  then  leave  mechanical  pur- 
suits; many  disapproved  of  slavery  anyway.49  Completer 
evidence  of  the  damage  wrought  by  slavery  is  the  actual 
emigration  of  natives  from  the  section  when  slaves  were 
crowding;  a  portion  of  the  population  which  under  other 
circumstances  might  have  taken  root  in  industrial  enterprise 
within  the  South  was  thus  driven  off. 

•1  47  "  With  the  line  around  slavery  being  drawn  more  closely  .  .  . 
the  cotton  South  lagged  in  the  industrial  race,  and  the  border  States 
were  hampered  by  the  institution  that  they  felt  to  be  a  burden,  but 
which  they  could  see  no  safe  way  to  abolish.  Compassed  as  it  was 
by  political  compromises,  slavery  must  ultimately  have  toppled 
through  its  own  overweight;  but  in  i860  it  was  so  valuable  for  the 
plantation  that  it  was  not  only  not  readily  converted  into  the  fac- 
tory, but  was  an  obstacle  in  the  way  of  the  employment  of  capital 
and  of  other  labor  in  that  direction"  (Ingle,  pp.  68-69). 

ft    48  Ingle,  p.  11. 

i,  49  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  pp.  213-214. 
Southern  whites  were  indisposed  to  welcome  those  who  could  not 
or  refused  to  grow  into  the  slavery  system.  A  newspaper  in  the 
fifties  betrayed  this :  "  A  large  proportion  of  the  mechanical  force 
that  migrate  to  the  South,  are  a  curse  instead  of  a  blessing;  they  are 
generally  a  worthless,  unprincipled  class — enemies  to  our  peculiar 
institutions  .  .  .  pests  to  society,  dangerous  among  the  slave  popu- 
lation, and  ever  ready  to  form  combinations  against  the  interest  of 
the  slaveholder,  against  the  laws  of  the  country,  and  against  the 
peace  of  the  Commonwealth."  But  slave-acquiring  merchants  were 
cordially  received  (quoted  in  Olmsted,  p.  511).  For  interesting 
facts  as  to  immigration  to  North  Carolina,  cf.  Tompkins,  History  of 

^Mecklenburg,  vol.  ii,  p,  204;  vol.  i,  p.  153. 


32  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        Q 1 38 

Communities  with  strong  foreign  infusion  and  slight  or 
no  reliance  upon  slavery,  showed  a  vigor  before  the  War 
which  has  been  to  them  a  continuing  advantage  into  the 
present.50  It  was  observed  that  competition  of  the  slave 
was  almost  matched  in  hurtfulness  by  the  example  of  the 
prosperous  white  man  with  whom  acquisition  of  the  com- 
forts and  dignities  of  life  did  not  proceed  from  daily  toil.51 

The  dependence  of  the  ante-bellum  South  upon  the  North 
and  upon  Europe  for  the  most  substantial  and  trivial  ap- 
purtenances of  civilization  was  spectacular.  It  might  be 
argued  in  apology  for  the  total  one-sidedness  of  the  old 
South,  that  the  section  was  responding  to  the  principle  of 
comparative  economic  advantage.  Certainly  the  most  ab- 
solute adherence  to  the  territorial  division  of  labor  could 
not  require  a  more  exclusive  devotion  to  the  making  of 
cotton  and  fuller  reliance  upon  less  peculiarly  favored  dis- 
tricts for  manufactured  goods  and  certain  foodstuffs  and 
materials,  than  the  South  displayed.  But  however  strict  in 
its  conformity  to  superficial  dictates  of  this  policy,  the  pro- 
gram was  ruinous  to  the  section  and  the  country,  and  was 
hurtful  to  the  economic  welfare  of  the  world.    Easy  yield- 

50  In  the  fifties  it  was  declared  that  the  most  prosperous  commu- 
nity in  South  Carolina  was  a  settlement  of  Germans  in  the  western 
part  of  the  State.  Here  had  been  founded  an  educational  institution, 
varied  manufactures,  farming  was  successful  and  capital  was  in- 
vested in  a  railroad  venture.  Slavery  bore  small  part  (Olmsted,  p. 
511).  In  1865  the  northwestern  counties  of  Georgia,  strongly  op- 
posed to  secession  and  which  furnished  soldiers  to  the  federal 
armies,  were  held  to  be  better  disposed  toward  the  national  govern- 
ment than  any  other  part  of  the  State;  slaves  had  constituted  less 
than  a  fourth  of  the  population.  Though  cruder  than  those  from 
the  seaboard,  delegates  from  this  section  to  the  constitutional  con- 
vention of  1865  were  said  to  have  a  well-informed  outlook  for  the 
Commonwealth  (Sidney  Andrews,  The  South  Since  the  War,  pp. 
342-343).  Study  of  the  conventions  of  other  States  immediately 
succeeding  the  War  shows  "  up-country "  representatives,  as  con- 
trasted with  those  of  the  "  low  country,"  more  easily  adjusting 
themselves  to  the  new  condition  and  readier  to  go  ahead  with  a 
changed  program.  It  was  said  that  at  a  time  when  the  average 
wage  of  female  operatives  in  Georgia  cotton  mills  was  half  that  paid 
in  Massachusetts,  New  England  factory  girls  were  induced  by  high 
wages  to  go  to  the  Southern  State,  but  returned  North  because  their 
position  was  unpleasant  in  "  the  general  degradation  of  the  laboring 
class"  (Olmsted,  p.  543). 

31  Ibid.,  p.  201. 


139]  THE   BACKGROUND  33 

ing  to  the  principle  did  not  suggest  to  statesmen  that  the 
South  after  all  was  in  only  partial  compliance — that  even 
ifor  the  most  efficient  production  of  cotton  as  such  there 
needed  to  be  a  wholesome  admixture  of  manufacturing  and 
of  other  agricultural  interests.  Post-bellum  industry 
brought  not  a  less  but  a  more  economical  and  larger  output 
of  the  staple. 

The  very  humor  of  many  passages  in  the  literature  of  the 
economic  history  of  the  South,  describing  the  need  of  the 
section  to  go  to  the  North  for  a  thousand  and  one  essentials 
of  daily  existence,  shows  the  seriousness  of  the  situation. 
Gregg,  too  lonely  in  his  advocacy  of  home  industry  to  treat 
the  subject  in  other  than  its  fundamental  aspects,  declared: 
*' A  change  in  our  habits  and  industrial  pursuits  i9  a  far 
greater  desideratum  than  any  change  in  the  laws  of  our 
government  .  .  .  ,"  and  "  if  we  continue  in  our  present 
habits,  it  would  not  be  unreasonable  to  predict,  that  when 
the  Raleigh  Rail-Road  is  extended  to  Columbia,  our  mem- 
bers of  the  Legislature  would  be  fed  on  Yankee  baker's 
■bread.  Pardon  me  for  repeating  the  call  on  South  Carolina 
to  go  to  work."  His  own  city  of  Charleston,  than  which 
there  was  no  greater  sinner,  had  regulations  against  the 
employment  of  steam  engines  that  stand1  in  striking  con- 
trast to  the  arguments  for  the  comparative  advantage  of 
steam  as  against  water  power  at  a  later  date  when  the  city 
centered  attention  upon  building  a  cotton  factory.52 

52  "  God  speed  the  day  when  her  [South  Carolina's]  politicians 
will  be  exhorting  the  people  to  domestic  industry,  instead  of  State 
resistance;  when  our  Clay  Clubs  and  Democratic  Associations  will 
be  turned  into  societies  for  the  advancement  of  scientific  agriculture 
and  the  promotion  of  mechanic  art;  when  our  capitalists  will  be 
found  following  the  example  of  Boston  and  other  Northern  cities, 
in  making  such  investments  of  their  capital  as  will  give  employment 
to  the  poor,  and  make  them  producers,  instead  of  burthensome  con- 
sumers ;  when  our  City  Council  may  become  so  enlightened  as  to  see 
the  propriety  of  following  the  example  of  every  other  city  in  the 
civilized  world,  in  removing  the  restrictions  on  the  use  of  the  Steam 
Engine,  now  indispensable  to  every  department  of  Manufacturing. 
.  .  ."  And  again :  "  He  who  has  possessed  himself  of  the  notion  that 
we  have  the  industry,  and  are  wronged  out  of  our  hard  earnings  by 
a  lazy  set  of  scheming  Yankees,  to  get  rid  of  this  delusion,  needs 
only  seat  himself  on  the  Charleston  wharves  for  a  few  days,  and 
3 


34  THE    RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [I4O 

A  decade  later  Helper  reproached  a  South  that  had  not 
given  heed  to  Gregg :  "  It  is  a  fact  well  known  to  every  in- 
telligent Southerner  that  we  are  compelled  to  go  to  the 
North  for  almost  every  article  of  utilty  and  adornment, 
from  matches,  shoepegs  and  paintings  up  to  cotton-mills, 
steamships  and  statuary.  .  .  .  All  the  world  sees,  or  ought 
to  see,  that  in  a  commercial,  mechanical,  manufactural, 
fiancial  and  literary  point  of  view,  we  are  as  helpless  as 
babes.  .  .  ."53  Gregg  remarked  the  supply  by  the  North 
not  only  of  the  articles  of  major  manufacture,  but  of  those 
adjuncts  of  agriculture  which  would  naturally  be  made 
within  the  South — axe,  hoe  and  broom  handles,  pitchforks, 
rakes,  hand-spikes,  shingles  and  pine  boards.54 

A  newspaper  in  Richmond  chronicled  the  sale  to  North- 
ern interests  of  a  large  coal  field  in  the  State,  and  in  un- 
conscious irony  placed  in  juxtaposition  to  the  notice  this 
confident  exhortation: 

behold  ship  after  ship  arrive  laden  down  with  the  various  articles 
produced  by  Yankee  industry"  (Domestic  Industry,  p.  9ff.).  ."The 
labor  of  negroes  and  blind  horses  can  never  supply  the  place  of 
steam,  and  this  power  is  withheld  lest  the  smoke  of  an  engine  should 
disturb  the  delicate  nerves  of  an  agriculturist;  or  the  noise  of  a 
mechanic's  hammer  should  break  in  upon  the  slumber  of  a  real 
estate  holder,  or  importing  merchant,  while  he  is  indulging  in  fanci- 
ful dreams,  or  building  on  paper,  the  Queen  City  of  the  South.  .  .  ." 
(ibid.,  p.  23). 

53  Helper,  pp.  21,  23.  Cf.  for  other  interesting  illustrations  of  de- 
pendence upon  the  North,  some  of  which  influenced  Henry  W. 
Grady.  An  orator  at  the  Southern  Commercial  Convention,  New 
Orleans,  1855,  adapted  for  the  occasion  the  famous  speech  in  the 
British  Parliament  on  taxes,  and  beginning,  in  the  Southern  version : 
"  It  is  time  that  we  should  look  about  us,  and  see  in  what  relation 
we  stand  to  the  North.  From  the  rattle  with  which  the  nurse 
tickles  the  ear  of  the  child  born  in  the  South,  to  the  shroud  that 
covers  the  cold  form  of  the  dead,  everything  comes  to  us  from  the 
North.  We  rise  from  between  sheets  made  in  Northern  looms,  and 
pillows  of  northern  feathers,  to  wash  in  basins  made  in  the  North 
.  .  .  ,"  and  continuing  in  the  strain  which  was  a  favorite  with  plat- 
form and  pen,  and  many  examples  of  which  may  be  found  (Olmsted, 
p.  544).     Cf.  Grady,  New  South,   (ed.  1890),  p.  188  ff. 

64  Domestic  Industry,  p.  8;  cf.  ibid.,  p.  II.  Olmsted  instances  a 
case,  probably  common  enough,  where  a  North  Carolina  planter  was 
buying  hay  grown  in  New  York  or  New  England  with  very  large 
charges  for  carriage  (pp.  378^-379).  Cf.  ibid.,  p.  175.  When  South- 
ern industrial  resources  were  exploited,  the  total  benefit  might  not 
come  to  the  locality.  Thus  shipwrights  at  Mobile  were  from  the 
North  (Olmsted,  p.  567). 


141  ]  THE    BACKGROUND  35 

'*  It  is  plain  that  a  new  and  glorious  destiny  awaits  the  South,  and 
beckons  us  onward  to  a  career  of  independence.  Shall  we  train  and 
discipline  our  energies  for  the  coming  crisis,  or  shall  we  continue  the 
tributary  and  dependent  vassals  of  Northern  brokers  and  money- 
changers? Now  is  the  time  for  the  South  to  begin  in  earnest  the 
work  of  self-development!  Now  is  the  time  to  break  asunder  the 
fetters  of  commercial  subjection,  and  to  prepare  for  that  more  com- 
plete independence  that  awaits  us.55 

Other  appeals  to  domestic  industry  were  as  clearly  in- 
spired by  sectional  animosity;  they  were  incidental  to  polit- 
ical ambition,  and  are  to  be  contrasted  with  the  generous, 
wholesome  rallying-cries  of  the  cotton  mill  campaign  twenty- 
five  years  later,  when  economic  sanity  had  gotten  the  better 
of  partisan  futilities.  Another  Virginia  paper,  wiser  than 
that  just  quoted,  urging  manufacturing  in  the  State  and 
particularly  textile  mills  for  Richmond,  anticipated  with 
different  mind  the  event  invited  by  its  contemporary,  and 
foretold  what  was  later  too  patent :  "  It  must  be  plain  in  the 
South  that  if  our  relations  with  the  North  should  ever  be 
severed — and  how  soon  they  may  be,  none  can  know  (may 
God  avert  it  long!) — we  would,  in  all  the  South,  not  be  able 
to  clothe  ourselves.  We  could  not  fell  our  forests,  plow 
our  fields,  nor  mow  our  meadows.  .  .  .  And  yet,  with  all 
these  things  staring  us  in  the  face,  we  shut  our  eyes,  and 
go  on  blindfold."56 

In  addition  to  the  barrier  to  manufactures  formed  by 

55  Olmsted,  p.  363. 

56  Ibid.,  p.  166.  An  "  Address  to  the  Farmers  of  Virginia,"  read 
at  a  convention  for  the  formation  of  a  State  Agricultural  Society 
in  1852,  adopted,  reconsidered  and  readopted  with  amendments,  and 
finally  reconsidered  again  and  rejected  on  the  ground  that  it  con- 
tained admissions,  however  true,  which  would  be  useful  to  aboli- 
tionists, contained  the  words :  " .  .  .  thus  we,  who  once  swayed  the 
councils  of  the  Union,  find  our  power  gone,  and  our  influence  on  the 
wane,  at  a  time  when  both  are  of  vital  importance  to  our  prosperity, 
if  not  to  our  safety.  As  other  States  accumulate  the  means  of  mate- 
rial greatness,  and  glide  past  us  on  the  road  to  wealth  and  empire, 
we  slight  the  warnings  of  dull  statistics,  and  drive  lazily  along  the 
field  of  ancient  customs,  or  stop  the  plow  to  speed  the  politician — 
should  we  not,  in  too  many  cases,  say  .  .  .  the  demagogue?  .  .  . 
With  a  wide-spread  domain,  with  a  kindly  soil,  with  a  climate  whose 
sun  radiates  fertility,  and  whose  very  dews  distill  abundance,  we 
find  our  inheritance  so  wasted  that  the  eye  aches  to  behold  the  pros- 
pect"  (ibid.,  p.  169). 


36  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [^42 

cotton  cultivation  under  slave  labor,  and  the  silent  opposi- 
tion which  the  prevalent  system  engendered,  were  not  in- 
frequent outspoken  declarations  against  industry.  William 
Gregg  was  one  of  the  few  in  the  South  to  rise  superior  to 
Calhoun's  sway,  and  asserting  that  there  were  some  who 
were  better  able  to  speak  of  the  propriety  of  factories  than 
even  that  statesman,  faced  him  squarely  but  tactfully: 
"The  known  zeal  with  which  this  gentleman  has  always 
engaged  in  every  thing  relating  to  the  interest  of  South- 
Carolina,  forbids  the  idea  that  he  is  not  a  friend  to  domestic 
manufactures,  fairly  brought  about,  and,  knowing,  as  he 
must  know,  the  influence  which  he  exerts,  he  should  be 
more  guarded  in  expressing  opinions  adverse  to  so  good  a 
cause."57  And  again,  speaking  of  manufactures,  he  was 
regretful  of  the  fact  that  "  our  great  men  are  not  to  be  found 
in  the  ranks  of  those  who  are  willing  to  lend  their  aid,  in 
promoting  this  good  cause.  Are  we  to  commence  another 
ten  years'  crusade,  to  prepare  the  minds  of  the  people  of 
this  State  for  revolution ;  thus  unhinging  every  department 
of  industry,  and  paralyzing  the  best  efforts  to  promote  the 
welfare  of  our  country  ?  "58 

57  Domestic  Industry,  p.  20. 
'*  58  Ibid.,  p.  14.    "Lamentable,  indeed,  is  it  to  see  so  wise  and  so  pure 

a  man  as  Langdon  Cheves,  putting  forth  the  doctrine,  to  South- 
Carolina,  that  manufactures  should  be  the  last  resort  of  a  country. 
With  the  greatest  possible  respect  for  the  opinions  of  this  truly 
great  man,  and  the  humblest  pretensions  on  my  part,  I  will  venture 
j,  the  assertion,  that  a  greater  error  was  never  committed  by  a  states- 

y'  man"   (ibid).    The  Southern  Quarterly  Review  in  1845,  the  same 

year  as  Gregg's  publication,  quoted  Cheves :  "  Manufactures  should 
be  the  last  resort  of  industry  in  every  country,  for  one  forced  as 
with  us,  they  serve  no  interests  but  those  of  the  capitalists  who  set 
them  in  motion,  and  their  immediate  localities."  And  Mr.  Kohn 
remarks,  "  This  expression  was  not  peculiar  to  any  one  class  of 
leaders  in  South  Carolina  at  that  time,"  and  instances  other  exam- 
ples (Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  13).  Tompkins  comments:  ".  .  . 
as  slavery  grew,  .  .  .  there  was  a  period  from  1840  to  i860,  when 
the  interest  of  the  South  sorely  needed  manufacturing  as  well  as 
agricultural  development.  Only  those  men  who  appreciated  this 
condition  undertook  to  go  counter  to  the  growing  sentiment  in 
favor  of  agriculture  and  slave  labor.  Those  who  did  continue  to 
manufacture,  were  necessarily  men  of  broad  views  and  great  abili- 
ties," and  he  speaks  of  some  of  the  notable  few — Gregg,  Fries,  Holt, 
Leak,  Morehead,  Hammett  (Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  p. 
180).     Cf.  also  references  to  Burkett  and  Poe  and  to  Brooks,  n.  42. 


»4^ 


143]  THE   BACKGROUND  l"J 

In  public-mindedness,  in  breadth  of  view,  in  qualities  of 
imagination,  in  sanity  of  judgment  that  did  not  sacrifice  un- 
derstanding of  his  misguided  contemporaries,  in  power  of 
analysis  of  the  confronting  situation,  William  Gregg  stood 
.  head  and  shoulders  above  other  Southerners  of  his  time. 
And  only  now,  seventy-five  years  later,  can  his  wisdom  be 
thoroughly  appreciated.  The  Lancashire  opposition,  which, 
despite  the  cotton  famine,  hated  slavery  and  led  to  British 
disaffection  when  the  warring  South  two  decades  after- 
wards most  needed  an  ally,  brilliantly  vindicated  his  warnr 
ing  to  his  antagonists  that  even  their  selfish  ambitions  could 
only  be  served  by  attention  to  such  reasoning  as  he  ad- 
vanced.   Gregg  said: 

Those  who  are  disposed  to  agitate  the  State  and  prepare  the  minds 
of  the  people  for  resisting  the  laws  of  Congress,  and  particularly 
those  who  look  for  so  direful  a  calamity  as  the  dissolution  of  our 
Union,  should,  above  all  others,  be  most  anxious  so  to  diversify  the 
industrial  pursuits  of  South-Carolina,  as  to  render  her  independent 
of  all  other  countries ;  for  as  sure  as  this  greatest  of  calamities  be- 
falls us,  we  shall  find  the  same  causes  that  produced  it,  making 
enemies  of  the  nations  which  are  at  present  the  best  customers  of 
our  agricultural  productions.59 

Because  of  the  striking  reversal  of  front  of  the  city  at  a 
later  date,  which  will  be  of  central  importance  in  subse- 
quent chapters  of  this  study,  Gregg's  advice  to  Charleston's 
capitalists  in  1856  is  interesting.  Condemning,  as  a  mem- 
ber of  the  legislature,  a  proposed  subsidy  to  a  railroad  to 
link  Charleston  and  Cincinnati,  put  forward  in  furtherance 
of  commercial  policies  selfishly  followed  by  "  wealthy  gen- 
tlemen, some  of  whom  have  ships  floating  in  every  sea,"  he 
declared  that  Charleston's  destiny  was  "  fixed  and  indis- 
soluble with  the  State  of  South-Carolina,  and  .  .  .  mainly 
her  great  investment  in  Internal  Improvements  should  be 
made  with  a  view  to  developing  the  resources  of  the  imme- 
diate country  around  her  .  .  .  cheap  modes  o.f  transporta- 

11  Cf.  Gregg,  Domestic  Industry,  pp.  19-20.  For  a  very  fine  passage 
refuting  _  Cheves'  position  and  defining  what  the  writer  meant  by 
"  domestic  manufactures  " — not  household  industry,  but  cotton  fac- 
tories throughout  the  State  and  craftsmen  at  every  cross-roads — see 

"ibid.,  pp.  14-16. 

59  Domestic  Industry,  p.  14 ;  cf.  ibid.,  p.  52. 


38  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [l44 

tion  from  all  quarters  of  the  State  could  not  fail  to  re-act 
on  the  general  prosperity  of  the  city  .  .  .  the  dormant 
wealth  of  Charleston  might  be  so  directed  as  to  be  felt  in 
the  remotest  parts  of  the  State,  in  stimulating  agriculture, 
draining  our  .  .  .  swamps  and  putting  into  renewed  cul- 
ture our  worn-out  and  waste  lands;  diversified  industry, 
stimulating  the  mechanic  arts  and  increasing  the  population 
and  wealth  of  the  State."  Instead  of  this  he  found  that 
"  there  is  no  city  in  the  Union  which  has  accumulated  more 
wealth,  to  its  size,  than  Charleston — none  that  has  shown  so 
little  inclination  to  develop  the  resources  of  the  State.  Her 
millionaires  die  in  New  York.  There  is  scarcely  a  day  that 
passes  that  does  not  send  forth  Charleston  capital  to  add 
to  the  growth  and  wealth  of  that  great  city."60 

The  characteristic  inclination  toward  the  individual 
rather  than  the  corporate  form  of  enterprise  which  was 
noticed  as  showing  itself  in  the  South  of  the  Revolutionary 
Period,  was  still  strong  up  to  the  Civil  War.  In  1845  Gregg 
inveighed  against  it,  particularly  as  crystallized  in  legislative 
refusal  to  grant  charters  of  incorporation;  he  was  quick  to 
hold  up  New  England  as  a  business  model  to  the  South. 
Those  who  have  sought  to  magnify  the  industrial  activities 
of  the  old  South  have  frequently  failed  to  take  into  account 
the  differences  in  organization  which  distinguished  enter- 
prises then  from  those  of  post-bellum  years.  The  textile  in- 
dustry could  not  be  a  movement  in  economic  society,  sink- 
ing its  roots  deep  and  extending  them  broadly,  so  long  as 
investment  participation  sprang  from  and  ended  with  indi- 
vidual initiative.  Until  the  widespread  emergence  of  the 
joint-stock  form,  the  mills  could  not  claim  and  embrace  the 
generality  of  the  community's  resources.  And  in  a  period 
when  this  device  was  not  largely  turned  to,  it  is  plain  that 
industrial  stirrings  were  comparatively  feeble.61 

60  Speech  on  Blue  Ridge  Railroad,  p.  67.     Cf.  ibid.,  p.  29. 

61  Gregg  hoped  that  dangers  to  be  apprehended  from  indiscrimi- 
nate granting  of  charters  to  banking  institutions  would  "not  be 
confounded  with,  and  brought  injuriously  to  bear  against  the  char- 
ters which  are  necessary  to  develope  [sic]  the  resources  of  our 
country,  and  give  an   impetus   to   all  industrial  pursuits.  .  .  .  The 


14S2  THE   BACKGROUND  39 

"  The  individualism  of  the  old  South,  the  inability  to  co- 
operate was  due  no  less  to  physical  than  social  isolation  be- 
tween portions  of  the  population.  Not  only  was  there  self- 
satisfaction  coupled  with  dependence  upon  the  North  for 
manufactured  commodities  in  the  low-country,  but  the 
up-country,  the  frugal  population  of  which  was  better  dis- 
posed for  manufacturing  development,  was  so  segregated 
as  to  be  kept  in  mean  state,  or  actually  dependent  itself 
upon  the  coastal  districts.  Between  the  Piedmont  and  the 
sea  was  the  barrier  of  plantations ;  between  the  Piedmont); 
and  the  industrial  North  were  no  transportation  facilities. 
Concentration  of  capital,  especially  in  the  corporate  form  of 
industrial  enterprise,  is  a  mark  of  economic  integration;  in 
the  ante-bellum  South  many  other  facts  besides  the  absence 
of  capital  concentration  show  the  lack  of  team  work,  of 
conditions  making  for  unity  of  thought  or  action.62 

practice  of  operating  by  associated  capital  gives  a  wonderful  stimulus 
to  enterprise.  .  .  .  Why  is  it  that  the  Bostonians  are  able  in  a  day, 
or  a  week,  to  raise  millions  at  one  stroke,  to  purchase  the  land  on 
both  sides  of  a  river,  for  miles,  to  secure  a  great  water  power  and 
the  erection  of  a  manufacturing  city?  .  .  .  The  divine,  lawyer,  doc- 
tor, schoolmaster,  guardian,  widow,  farmer,  merchant,  mechanic, 
common  labourer,  in  fact,  the  whole  community  is  made  tributary 
to  these  great  enterprises.  The  utility  and  safety  of  such  institu- 
tions is  no  longer  problematical.  ...  If  we  shut  the  door  against 
associated  capital  and  place  reliance  upon  individual  exertion,  we 
may  talk  over  the  matter  and  grow  poorer  for  fifty  years  to  come, 
without  effecting  the  change  in  our  industrial  pursuits,  necessary  to 
renovate  the  fortunes  of  our  State.  .  .  .  About  three-fourths  of  the 
manufacturing  of  the  United  States,  is  carried  on  by  joint-stock 
companies ;  ...  we  shall  certainly  have  to  look  to  such  companies 
to  introduce  the  business  with  us."  He  showed,  by  South  Carolina 
examples,  the  perpetuity  of  the  corporate  form  as  contrasted  with 
the  frequently  limited  life  of  the  personal  enterprise  (An  Enquiry 
into  the  Propriety  of  Granting  Charters  of  Incorporation  for  Manu- 
facturing and  Other  Purposes,  in  South  Carolina,  pp.  4-11). 

62 "  Isolation  gave  birth  to  individualism,  as  marked  upon  the 
mountain-clearing  as  upon  the  plantation ;  and  beginnings  of  the  co- 
operative spirit  were  dwarfed  by  nature  and  by  human  inclination 
.  .  ."  (Ingle,  p.  32  ff.).  Cf.  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation, 
vol.  v,  pp.  314-315.  Olmsted  found  mountain  wagons  coming  some- 
times two  hundred  miles  to  the  head  of  navigation  in  North  Caro- 
lina (p.  361  and  pp.  358-359).  The  division  of  capital  among  small 
mills  rather  than  its  investment  in  larger  factories  is  paralleled  by 
the  relatively  larger  number  of  church  buildings  in  the  South  than 
in  the  North;  with,  however,  relatively  small  seating  capacity  (Ingle, 
p.  32  ff.).    The  same  tendency  may  be  seen  in  respect  to  poorhouses, 


40  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        {^146 

The  non-industrial  character  of  the  old  South  may  be 
seen  not  only  in  internal  fact,  but  in  external  reflection 
equally  conclusive.  Of  external  evidences,  the  political  per- 
haps most  readily  occurs  to  one.  Pervasive  economic  con- 
ditions come  certainly  to  the  surface  in  political  pretensions ; 
economic  transitions  are  registered  in  alterations  of  political 
front.  The  protective  tariff  of  1816  was  introduced  and 
defended,  respectively,  by  two  South  Carolinians — Lowndes 
and  Calhoun.  The  signature  of  a  Virginia  president — 
Madison — made  it  a  law.  This  tariff  was  opposed  by  New 
England  in  the  person  of  Webster.  In  1828,  in  the  debate 
over  the  "Tariff  of  Abominations,"  the  situation  was  just 
the  reverse — Calhoun  opposed  protection,  Webster  cham- 
pioned it.  In  swapping  sides,  both  men  were  answering  to 
the  changed  economic  interests  of  their  respective  sections. 
11  No  clearer  picture  is  needed  of  the  trend  of  the  South  in 
ante-bellum  years  than  the  spectacle  of  Calhoun  trans- 
formed from  nationalist  to  sectionalist.63 

Cotton,  nearly  exclusively  in  the  South,  and  to  a  notable 
degree  in  New  England,  was  responsible  underneath  for 
the  alterations  which  were  displayed  in  the  superficial  play 
of  politics.  It  was  the  disintegration  of  manufactures 
brought  about  by  more  and  more  extensive  embracing  of 
cotton  cultivation  that  turned  the  South  from  protection  to 
free  trade;, it  was  the  growing  absorption  in  industry,  espe- 
cially cotton  manufacture,  and  relative  relinquishing  of 
commerce,  that  made  New  England  protectionist  instead  of, 
as  before,  the  champion  of  free  trade.64 

asylums,  hospitals  and  jails  (Dodd,  Expansion  and  Conflict,  p.  231; 
cf.  industrial  map  for  i860,  p.  188,  showing  few  plants  of  an  output 
of  $250,000  south  of  Maryland). 

63  Upon  this  whole  matter,  see  Scherer,  p.  179  ff.  "In  1816,  when 
Webster  opposed  protection,  there  was  a  capital  of  only  about 
$52,000,000  invested  in  textile  manufacture,  of  which  much  still  lay 
in  the  South.  In  1828,  when  he  reversed  his  position,  this  capital 
had  probably  doubled,  and  had  become  localized  in  and  about  New 
England"  (ibid.,  p.  181).     Cf.  ibid.,  p.  234. 

64  Ibid.,  p.  152.  Slavery  added  to  cotton  brought  the  extra  confu- 
sion of  purely  political  animosities.  "  At  the  beginning  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  the  tariff  was  not  a  matter  which  was  exclusively 
political.  .  .  .  The  subject  ceased  to  be  an  economic  one  and  became 


147]  THE   BACKGROUND  4 1 

This  is  not  the  place  to  remark  at  length  how  economic 
interests  are  changing  the  South  back,  in  partial  measure, 
to  the  first  position.  Cotton  is  again  central.  Cotton  fac- 
tories are  largely  responsible  for  the  little  leaven  that  is 
working  in  a  large  loaf,  producing  in  the  heart  of  the  Solid 
South  Republican  adherents  and  voices  for  protection. 
"  Slavery  has  been  abolished.  The  South  has  reestablished 
manufactures.  Its  interests  in  free  trade  and  protection 
are  changed  from  what  they  were  in  i860.  We  need  not 
only  domestic  trade,  but  foreign  markets.  We  need,  ap- 
parently, protection  and  free  trade  at  the  same  time.  .  .  . 
The  South  is  as  much  interested  in  protection  to  home 
markets  as  New  England  is.  New  England  is  as  much  in- 
terested in  export  markets  as  the  South  is.  In  this  situation 
we  ought  to  get  together  .  .  .  for  '  Protection  and  Reci- 
procity.' "65 

It  is  interesting  to  examine  a  summary  of  the  industrial 
history  of  the  South  in  the  fifty  years  preceding  the  Civil 
War,  given  by  an  important  writer : 

it 

Between  1810  and  i860  three  periods  of  progress  marked  the  fac- 
tory development  of  the  cotton  states.  During  our  last  war  with 
England.  .  .  .  mill  builders  from  the  North  migrated  to  the  Southern 
highlands,  and  with  local  cooperation  established  small  yarn  factories 
at  several  places  in  the  Carolinas,  Georgia,  Tennessee,  and  Kentucky. 
.  .  .  During  the  decade  ending  with  1833,  when  hostility  to  the  tariff 
made  the  Southern  people  bitterly  resent  economic  dependence  on 
the  North,  there  was  a  second  movement  towards  manufactures, 
especially  in  South  Carolina  and  Georgia,  directed  mainly  towards 
the  erection  of  larger  and  more  complete  factories.  This  agitation 
bore  fruit  in  some  corporate  enterprises,  most  of  which  had  but 
qualified  success.  Finally,  in  the  late  forties  real  factory  develop- 
ment began  simultaneously  at  several  points,  and  had  not  two  finan- 
cial crises  and  a  war  checked  its  progress,  we  should  probably  date 
from  this  time  the  beginning  of  the  modern  epoch  of  cotton  manu- 
facturing in  the  South.66 


a  political  one  in  proportion  as  slavery  grew  in  the  South  and  dimin- 
ished in  the  North,  and  in  inverse  proportion  as  manufactures  dried 
up  in  the  South  and  became  of  greater  importance  in  the  North" 
(Tompkins,  The  Tariff  and  Reciprocity). 

65  Tompkins,  Tariff  and  Protection. 

66  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  p.  316  ff. ;  Cf . 
ibid.,  pp.  330r33i.  Contrast  Tompkins,  History  of  Mecklenburg, 
vol.  i,  pp.  133-137- 


42  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [148 

Two  objections  against  this  view  have  pertinence.  In  the 
first  place,  these  three  periods  of  comparative  interest  in 
manufactures  can  hardly  be  called  "movements"  in  any 
social  or  economic  sense.  That  of  the  twenties  and  running 
into  the  thirties  may  claim  more  color  of  this  than  the  other 
two.67  The  plants  set  up  by  New  Englanders  earlier  were 
in  response  to  individual  enterprise,  and  that  enterprise  born 
out  of  the  boundaries  of  the  South.  Cooperation  with  the 
newcomers  was  not  of  the  sort  that  marks  the  considerable 
interest  of  a  community.  To  the  extent  that  mills  were 
built  in  the  forties  as  a  result  of  public  agitation,  William 

67  But  some  of  the  agitation  for  industries  in  these,  as  in  other 
years,  had  a  flavor  not  symptomatic  of  healthy  desire  for  improve- 
ment. Conventions  looking  to  railroad  development  were  held  in 
North  Carolina  and  Tennessee  in  the  middle  thirties.  Of  the  advan- 
tages which  it  was  agreed  would  flow  from  the  building  of  the 
Charleston  and  Cincinnati  Railroad,  it  was  declared  that  "  it  will 
form  a  bond  of  union  between  the  States  [i.e.,  Southern  States] 
which  will  give  safety  to  our  property  and  security  to  our  institu- 
tions "  (Tompkins,  History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  i,  p.  125).  Of 
more  positive  character  was  the  utterance  of  a  Southerner  who 
viewed  with  concern  the  danger  that  the  North  would  crush  slavery 
and  place  the  South  under  complete  submission  to  tariff  aggressions, 
congressional  representation  for  the  latter  section  finding  a  stop  in 
the  limit  of  slave  territory.  "  Under  these  circumstances,  the  true 
policy  of  the  South  is  distinct  and  clearly  marked.  She  must  resort 
to  the  same  means  by  which  power  is  accumulated  at  the  north,  to 
secure  it  for  herself."  If  the  South  should  manufacture  a  large 
portion  of  its  cotton  crop  "  we  reduce  the  quantity  for  export,  and 
the  competition  for  that  remainder  will  add  greatly  to  our  wealth, 
while  it  will  place  us  in  a  position  to  dictate  our  own  terms.  The 
manufactories  will  increase  our  population;  increased  population 
and  wealth  will  enable  us  to  chain  the  southern  states  proudly  and 
indissolubly  together  by  railroads  and  other  internal  improvements; 
and  these  works  by  affording  a  speedy  communication  from  point  to 
point,  will  prove  our  surest  defense  against  either  foreign  aggres- 
sion or  domestic  revolt.  ...  If  the  evil  day  shall  ever  come  when 
the  south  shall  be  satisfied  that  she  cannot  remain  in  the  Union  with 
safety  to  her  institutions,  it  [i.e.,  industrial  self-sufficiency]  will 
place  her  in  a  condition  to  maintain  her  separate  nationality"  (E. 
Steadman,  of  Tennessee,  quoted  in  J.  D.  B.  DeBow,  Industrial  Re- 
sources of  the  South  and  Southwest,  vol.  ii,  p.  127).  Objection  to 
massing  poor  whites  in  mills  was  combatted  by  a  Charlestonian  with 
the  reflection  that  small  farming  with  slave  labor  brought  discontent 
that  might  mean  social  upheaval,  whereas  the  factory  opened  a' door 
of  opportunity  making  for  stability;  when  poor  whites  should  have 
the  chance  of  owning  a  slave  "  they  would  increase  the  demand  for 
that  kind  of  property,  and  would  become  firm  and  uncompromising 
supporters  of  Southern  institutions"  (Ingle,  pp.  25-26). 


149]  THE   BACKGROUND  43 

Gregg  was  almost  wholly  responsible.  It  has  been  pointed 
out  above  that  Gregg  was  a  missionary  who  preached  an 
unaccepted  faith.  He  was  not  a  social  exponent.  In  the 
second  place,  it  is  gratuitous  to  count  upon  what  would 
have  been  the  case  had  not  the  war  broken  in  upon  declared 
industrial  beginnings.  The  Civil  War  was  not  a  fortuitous 
event.  It  had  to  come.  It  was  the  disastrous  evidence  of 
the  -dominance  in  the  South  of  a  system  which  gave  no  room 
to  widespread  industrial  enterprise.  Could  the  war  be  re- 
garded simply  as  an  occurrence,  an  unfortunate  happening, 
there  would  perhaps  be  ground  for  assuming  that  indus- 
trial enterprise  might  have  been  built  into,  and  finally 
changed  wholesomely,  the  economic  regime  of'  the  ante-bel- 
lum South,  but  facts  show  that  it  was  a  case  where  mastery 
between  mutually  exclusive  plans  had  to  be  tried  on  the 
basis  of  comparative  strength.  The  spirit  for  manufactures 
had  not  sufficient  force  to  avert  the  war,  but  only  enough 
life  to  show,  in  expiring,  that  it  had  begun  to  be  born. 
i-»  The  decade  1850-1860  has  been  reserved  for  specific 
treatment  at  this  point  because  two  Southern  writers  have 
sought,  rather  dogmatically,  to  invest  it  with  a  character  of 
industrialism!  superior  to  that  of  ante-bellum  years  gen- 
erally and  to  show  that  it  fathered  later  growth.  Mr.  Ed- 
monds has  said:  "A  study  of  the  facts  .  .  .  should  con- 
vince anyone  that  the  South  in  its  early  days  gave  close 
attention  to  manufacturing  development,  and  that  while 
later  on  the  great  profits  in  cultivation  caused  a  contraction 
of  the  capital  and  energy  of  that  section  in  farming  opera- 
tions, yet,  after  1850,  there  came  renewed  interest  in  in- 
dustrial matters,  resulting  in  an  astonishing  advance  an 
v  railroad  construction  and  in  manufactures."68 

C  68  Edmonds,  P-1&.  It  is  shown  how  the  course  of  cotton  prices 
affected-irliluWyfTrom  1800  to  1839  cotton  averaged  a  fraction  over 
17  cents;  in  1840  the  price  dropped  to  9  cents,  continuing  to  decline 
to  the  1846  average  of  5.63  cents,  when,  after  a  short  crop,  there 
was  a  sharp  rise  in  1847,  only  to  be  followed  by  a  fall  to  8  cents  and 
less.  "  These  excessively  low  prices  brought  about  a  revival  of 
public  interest  in  other  pursuits  than  cotton  cultivation.  .  .  ."  It  is 
said  that  from  1850  to  i860  the  South  quadrupled  its  railroad  mi- 


44  THE   RISE    0F    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        £l$0 

It  is  stated  that  "  Cotton  manufacturing  had  commenced 
to  attract  increased  attention,  and  nearly  $12,000,000  were 
invested  in  Southern  cotton  mills.  In  Georgia  especially 
this  industry  was  thriving,  and  between  1850  and  i860  the 
capital  so  invested  in  that  State  nearly  doubled."69 

The  assertion  that  in  i860  the  South  had  in  all  24,590  in- 
dustrial establishments  with  an  investment  of  $175,000,000 
loses  force  when,  by  a  simple  division,  it  is  seen  that  on  an 
average  this  made  the  investment  in  each  only  $7,144.37, 
which  is  surely  not  indicative  of  considerable  importance. 
Many  of  the  establishments  must  have  been  much  smaller 
than  would  be  represented  by  this  average,  and  the  few 
which  were  a  great  deal  larger  were  rare  exceptions.  The 
very  disparity  in  size  of  enterprises  points  away  from  any 
concerted  movement  toward  manufacturing.  As  to  the  rail- 
roads, many  of  them  were  narrow-gauge,  and  all  the  facts 
tend  to  show  that  railroads  were  looked  upon  as  facilitating 
commerce  rather  than  manufactures.70 

In  vaunting  property  figures  of  the  South  of  i860  as 
compared  with  those  of  the  North,  Mr.  Edmonds  has  given 
himself  to  the  most  obvious  and  serious  error  of  including 
slaves.71    Slaves,  though  in  the  legal  sense  agreed  to  belong 

leage,  in  the  latter  year  being  387  miles  in  advance  of  New  England 
(ibid.,  p.  10 ff.).  For  an  account  of  late  colonial  and  Revolutionary 
development,  see  ibid.,  p.  3  ff.     Cf.  DeBow,  vol,  iii,  p.  76  ff. 

69  Edmonds,  Facts  about  South,  p.  10  ff.  Judging  by  the  United 
States  census  of  manufactures,  these  figures  are  grossly  inaccurate. 
In  i860  the  Southern  States  had  $9,840,221  invested  in  cotton  manu- 
facturing, and  in  Georgia  the  investment  increased  from  $1,736,156 
in  1850  to  $2,126,103  in  i860,  or  less  than  30  per  cent  (United  States 
Census  of  Manufactures,  1900,  Cotton  Manufactures,  p.  56). 

70  Even  after  the  war  the  pet  scheme  to  build  a  railroad  over  the 
mountains  gathered  sentiment  in  the  long-cherished  desire  to  link 
Charleston  with  "  the  producing  interior  "  typified  in  Cincinnati ;  as 
rails  were  laid,  piece-meal,  through  the  Piedmont,  advantages  thus 
afforded  for  the  erection  of  factories  were  seldom  mentioned.  The 
easier  transport  of  cotton  and  the  development  of  the  South  Atlantic 
ports  were  the  thoughts  uppermost.  See  above,  p.  37.  In  the  case 
of  North  Carolina,  it  is  said  that  the  railroads  by  bringing  in  manu- 
factures cheaper  than  local  plants  could  supply  them,  actually  hurt 
the  advance  of  individual  enterprise  (Thompson,  p.  31). 

71 "  Blot  out  of  existence  in  one  night  every  manufacturing  enter- 
prise in  the  whole  country,  with  all  the  capital  employed  [he  was 
writing  in  1894],  and  the  loss  would  not  equal  that  sustained  by  the 


I5l]  THE   BACKGROUND  45 

to  certain  persons,  were,  socially  and  economically  consid- 
ered,  no  more  property  and  wealth  than  were  their  masters. 
In  their  emancipation  the  South  did  not  lose,  but  gained,  if 
their  labor  in  freedom  may  be  thought  to  be  more  produc- 
tive than  when  they  were  chattels.72 

Mr.  Edmonds  makes  such  over-zealous  statements  as  that 

vy"The  energy  and  enterprise  displayed  by  the  South  in  the 
extension  of  its  agricultural  interests  was  fully  as  great  as 
the  energy  displayed  in  the  development  of  New  England's 
manufactures  or  that  of  the  pioneers  who  opened;  up  the 
West  to  civilization,"'  and  greatly  overreaches  in  his  disap- 
proval of  the  phrase  "  The  New  South,"  "  a  term  which  is 
so  popular  everywhere  except  in  the  South,  .  .  .  supposed 
to  represent  a  country  of  different  idea9  and  different  busi- 
ness methods  from  those  which  prevailed  in  the  old  ante- 
bellum days.  ...  Its  use  ...  as  intended  to  convey  the 
meaning  that  the  South  of  late  years  is  something  entirely 
new  and  foreign  to  this  section  ...  is  wholly  unjust  to 
the  South  of  the  past  and  present.  It  needs  but  little  inves- 
tigation to  show  that  prior  to  the  war  the  South  was  fully 

ft  abreast  of  the  times  in  all  business  interests."73  His  real 
purpose,    which    does    not    require    ill-considered    harking 

South  as  a  result  of  the  war.  .  .  .  New  England  and  the  Middle 
States,  having  grown  rich  by  the  war,  almost  trebled  their  property 
[from  i860  to  1870]  while  the  South  drops  from  the  first  place  to 
the  third.  In  i860  it  outranked  the  Northern  section  by  $750,000,- 
000."  Mr.  Edmonds  does  not  note  the  inclusion  of  the  slaves  in  his 
"property"  figures  (p.  18  ff.).  In  reference  to  the  false  idea  ot  pros- 
perity in  the  ante-bellum  South,  it  has  been  said:  "A  delusion  of 
great  wealth  was  created  in  the  listing  as  taxable  property  of  slaves 
to  the  amount  of  at  least  two  thousand  millions"  (Hart,  p.  218). 
72  "  As  commonly  used  the  word  '  wealth '  is  applied  to  anything 
having  an  exchange  value.  But  when  used  as  a  term  of  political 
economy  it  must  be  limited  to  a  much  more  definite  meaning,  because 
many  things  are  commonly  spoken  of  as  wealth  which  in  taking 
account  of  collective  or  general  wealth  cannot  be  considered  as 
wealth  at  all.  .  .  .  Such  are  slaves,  whose  value  represents  merely 
the  power  of  one  class  to  appropriate  the  earnings  of  another.  .  .  . 
All  this  relative  wealth,  which,  in  common  thought  and  speech,  in 
legislation  and  law,  is  undistinguished  from  actual  wealth,  could, 
without  the  destruction  or  consumption  of  anything  more  than  a  few 
drops  of  ink  and  a  piece  of  paper,  be  utterly  annihilated"  (George, 
PP.  38-39). 
-$c   n     73  Edmonds,  pp.  1-2. 


46  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN   THE    SOUTH        [_l$2 

back  to  ante-bellum  years,  is  to  show  that  "the  wonderful 
industrial  growth  which  has  come  since  1880  has  been  due 
mainly  to  Southern  men  and  Southern  money,"  and  it  is 
well  to  rest  bis  exposition  with  the  proper  statement  that 
"  Since  1880 "  the  people  of  the  South  "  have  turned  to 
manufacturing  with  a  facility  that  not  only  shows  that  they 
are  in  no  way  lacking  in  capability  to  compete  in  manufac- 
turing pursuits,  but,  considering  the  limited  capital,  this 
section  has  exhibited  remarkable  gains  in  developing  its 
resources  under  adverse  conditions.  In  a  little  more  than  a 
decade  from  the  time  the  work  of  development  may  be  said 
to  have  begun  .  .  .  nobody  .  .  .  doubts  that  the  South  can 
compete  with  New  England  in  the  manufacture  of  cotton 
goods,  but  many  do  doubt  whether  New  England  can  com- 
pete with  the  South.  .  .  ."74 

Edgar  Garner  Murphy  embraced  the  viewpoint  and  made 
more  categorical  the  statements  of  Mr.  Edmonds  respect- 
ing Southern  industrial  history.  "The  present  industrial 
development  of  the  South,"  he  wrote,  "  is  not  a  new  crea- 
tion. It  is  chiefly  a  revival.  .  .  .  Instead  of  industrial  in- 
action we  find  from  the  beginnings  of  Southern  history  an 
industrial  movement,  characteristic  and  sometimes  even 
provincial  in  its  methods,  but  presenting  a  consistent  and 
creditable  development  up  to  the  very  hour  of  the  Civil 
War.  The  issue  of  this  war  meant  no  mere  economic  re- 
versal. It  meant  economic  catastrophe,  drastic,  desolate. 
.  .  .  Thus  the  later  story  of  the  industrial  South  is  but  a 
story  of  reemergence."75    The  steps  of  Mr.  Edmond's  argu- 

74  Ibid.,  p.  21.     Cf.  ibid.,  pp.  19-20. 

75  E.  G.  Murphy,  The  Present  South,  p.  97.  With  modifications 
prompted  by  deeper  study,  Clark  has  presented  about  the  same  inter- 
pretation of  the  decade  of  the  fifties  as  that  of  Edmonds  and 
Murphy :  "  The  South  resented  economic  dependence,  yet  lacked  the 
population,  the  experience,  the  capital  and  the  habits  that  foster 
manufactures  and  diversify  industries.  It  was  topheavy  with  cotton, 
and  slave  agriculture  unbalanced  its  economic  life.  .  .  .  Yet  had  the 
war  not  intervened,  manufactures  would  have  revived  and  increased 
as  settlement  became  denser,  railways  more  numerous,  and  capital 
more  abundant  in  proportion  to  resources,  until  these  states  by  their 
own  potency  would  have  remoulded  their  industrial  economy  "  (in 
South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  pp.  330-331).    For  statements 


153]  THE    BACKGROUND  47 

merit  are  then  repeated,  except  that  Mr.  Murphy  failed  to 
see  the  almost  total  lapse  of  industrial  activity  by  1840. 

The  incentive  to  discover  an  industrial  past  for  the  sec- 
tion, which  Mr.  Edmonds  found  in  the  desire  to  establish 
the  South  as  the  magician  of  her  post-bellum  awakening, 
was  matched  in  Mr.  Murphy's  motive  by  a  more  penetrat- 
ing purpose.  In  commenting  upon  the  growing  importance 
of  manufactures  as  contrasted  with  agriculture,  which  was 
the  most  distinctive  economic  movement  after  1880,  he  de- 
clared that  "  it  is  but  one  reassertion  of  the  genius  of  the 
old  South."  Though  his  words  boldly  invite  such  a  con- 
struction, it  was  outside  of  his  object  to  mean  by  this  that  a 
genius  for  industrialism  had  run  through  the  earlier  history 
of  the  section.  His  true  desire  was  to  assert  that  "  The  old 
South  was  the  real  nucleus  of  the  new  nationalism,"  the 
old  South  in  the  sense  of  "  the  South  of  responsibility,  the 
men  of  family,  the  planter  class,  the  official  soldiery,  or  (if 
you  please)  the  aristocracy, — the  South  that  had  had 
power,  and  to  whom  power  had  taught  those  truths  of  life, 
those  dignities  and  fidelities  of  temper,  which  power  always 
teaches  men.  .  .  ."  He  regretted  that  this  old  South  was 
not  able  to  come  into  force  until  after  Reconstruction  be- 
cause "  a  doubt  wa9  put  upon  its  word  given  at  Appomattox. 
.  .  .  Power  was  struck  from  its  hands.  Its  sense  of  respon- 
sibility was  wounded  and  confused."78 

This  is  a  fine  statement  of  a  primary  truth  in  the  devel- 
opment of  the  South  that  began  about  the  year  1880.  The 
old  South  did  draw  breath  with  the  new.  The  permanent 
character  of  the  South,  the  forces  resident  in  the  South  of 
earlier  as  of  later  years,  were  those  which  largely  made  pos- 
sible a  complete  change  in  viewpoint,  which  carried  through 
the  measure  of,  if  not  indeed  giving  birth  to,  a  reversed 
program.  But,  as  Mr.  Murphy  did  not  see,  there  is  a  radi- 
cal distinction  between  the  continuity  of  this  quality  in  the 

probably  influenced  by  Edmonds  or  Murphy,  or  both,  see  St.  George 
L.    Sioussat,   in   The   History   Teacher's   Magazine,    Sept.,    1916,   p. 
224,  and  J.  J.  Spalding,  in  Proceedings,  Fourth  Annual  Convention, 
Georgia  Industrial  Association,  pp.  44-45. 
76  Murphy,  pp.  10-11. 


48  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE    SOUTH        £l  54 

South  and  any  continuity  of  its  evidences  in  industrial  pur- 
suits. The  new  South  did  not  receive  from  the  old  South 
a  heritage  of  industrial  tradition;  what  it  received  was  an 
ingrained  and  living  social  morality,  not  marred  in  its  es- 
sential characteristics,  and  very  likely,  strange  as  it  may 
appear,  even  assisted,  by  the  institution  of  slavery.77 

Against  some  suggestions  of  an  industrial  character  for 
the  fifties,78  may  be  placed  much  evidence  of  an  opposite 
nature.  Thus  Hammond,  of  South  Carolina,  in  the  United. 
States  Senate  on  March  4,  1858,  goaded,  perhaps,  by  the 
assaults  of  Helper  and  Seward,  is  found  setting  up  figures 
of  supposed  per  capita  surplus  production  of  the  South  as 
superior  to  those  of  the  rest  of  the  world,  and  forgetting 
that  not  wealth  but  economic  power  is  the  measure  of  the 
strength  of  a  people.79 

The  obsession  with  cotton,  and  the  crazy  confidence  which 
the  staple  engendered,  come  out  in  the  defiant  valedictory 
which  this  spokesman  flung  to  the  North :  " .  .  .  would  any 
sane  nation  make  war  on  cotton?  Without  firing  a  gun, 
without  drawing  a  sword,  should  they  make  war  on  us  we 
could  bring  the  whole  world  to  our  feet.  .  .  .  What  would 

77  "  This  sense  of  responsibility,  deepened  rather  than  destroyed 
by  the  burden  of  slavery,  was  the  noble  and  fruitful  gift  of  the  old 
South  to  the  new,  a  gift  born  of  the  conditions  of  an  aristocracy,  but 
responsive  and  operative  under  every  challenge  in  the  changing  con- 
ditions of  the  later  order"  (ibid.,  p.  21). 

78  A  list  of  cotton  factories  in  Alabama  in  1852,  the  largest  of 
which  had  only  3,080  spindles,  is  contained  in  DeBow,  vol.  i,  p.  233. 
For  a  similar  list  for  South  Carolina  in  1847,  see  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills 
of  S.  C,  pp.  17-18;  cf.  Gregg,  Domestic  Industry,  pp.  24-25.  As  to 
railroads,  see  DeBow,  vol.  iii,  p.  76  ff.  Where  cotton  mills  were 
urged,  the  tone  of  the  press  might  be  casual  as  compared  with  that 
characterizing  the  later  period  of  the  eighties  when  advocacy  was 
passionate ;  e.g. :  "  We  are  glad  to  learn  that  our  men  of  enterprise 
and  capital  are  at  length  waking  up  on  the  subject.  This  is  the 
best  business  that  they  could  turn  their  attention  to  with  the  view 
of  realizing  profits  .  .  .  while  at  the  same  time  it  gives  new  life  and 
energy  to  the  surrounding  community"  (North  Carolina  Standard, 
Feb.  27,  1850,  quoted  in  Pleasants  MS.). 

79  Scherer,  p.  235  ff.  Cf.  Friedrich  List,  National  System  of  Po- 
litical Economy.  Hammond  indulged  largely  in  estimates ;  as  to 
untrustworthiness  of  census  figures  of  wealth  in  these  years,  see 
Olmsted,  pp.  512-513,  and  M.  T.  Copeland,  The  Cotton  Manufactur- 
ing Industry  of  the  United  States,  p.  18,  note. 


155]]  THE   BACKGROUND  49    -# 

happen  if  no  cotton  were  furnished  for  three  years?  .  .  . 
England  would  topple  headlong  and  carry  the  whole  civil- 
ized world  with  her,  save  the  South.  No,  you  do  not  dare 
to  make  war  on  cotton.  No  power  on  earth  dares  to  make 
war  upon  it.    Cotton  is-  King."80 

Propaganda  toward  sweeping  in  Mexico  and  the  Spanish 
West  Indies  to  the  Southern  slavery  system,  when  it  became 
apparent  by  1856  that  further  expansion  in  the  West  was 
impossible,  paralleled  the  academic  instruction  given 
throughout  his  whole  career  by  Professor  Dew  in  the  Col- 
lege of  William  and  Mary.81 

il  Ship-building,  often  urged  because  of  superior  advan- 
tages for  the  industry,  did  not  take  hold  in  the  South.82  In 
capital  investment,  presumption  was  against  everything  but 
cotton  cultivation.  Those  who  in  the  later  period  invested 
in  manufactures  were  before  the  war  slave  holders.  Fear 
that  the  presence  of  manufactures  might  undermine  free 
trade  tenets  of  the  South  had  some  influence  against  indus- 
try.83 Only  inhibitions  against  manufacturing  as  pervasive 
and  unconsicous  as  they  were  effective  can  explain  the  sur- 
prise with  which  Southerners  contemplated  the  failure  of 
cotton  mills  set  in  the  midst  of  cotton  fields.84     The  pro- 

>  80  Quoted  in  Scherer,  p.  235  ff.  How  little  thought  had  been  given 
to  the  South's  economic  self-sufficiency  appears  in  this  warning  to 
the  North:  "  The  South  have  (sic)  sustained  you  in  a  great  measure. 
You  are  our  factors.  .  .  .  Suppose  we  were  to  discharge  you;  sup- 
pose we  were  to  take  our  business  out  of  your  hands;  we  would 
consign  you  to  anarchy  and  poverty"  (quoted  in  Scherer,  p.  241). 
Cf.  the  spirited  dissent  from  such  thinking  by  Cassius  M.  Clay,  as 
quoted  in  Helper,  pp.  206-207.  Hammond's  views  are  readily  am- 
plified by  reference  to  proslavery  writings,  especially  those  of  Christy, 
Bledsoe,  Stringfellow,  Harper,  Dew. 

81  Dodd,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  p.  573. 

82  Cf.  Olmsted,  p.  539,  note,  and  table  on  p.  541 ;  Ingle,  pp.  70-71. 

83  Cf.  Ingle,  pp.  70-71.  "  Of  the  twenty  millions  of  dollars  an- 
nually realized  from  the  sales  of  the  cotton  crop  of  Alabama,  nearly 
alt  not  expended  in  supporting  the  producers  is  reinvested  in  lands 
and  negroes,"  and  from  this  proceeded  "senility  and  decay"  (Hon. 
C.  C.  Clay,  Jr.,  speaking  to  a  horticultural  society  in  1855,  quoted  in 
Olmsted,  p.  577).  Cf.  B.  F.  Perry,  in  address  before  S.  C.  Insti- 
tute, 1855,  quoted  in  Helper,  pp.  229-230. 

84  Cf.  Sparta,  Ga.,  dispatch  to  Charleston  News,  July,  1855,  in 
Olmsted,  pp.  543-544.  The  decade  1850-1860  was  the  most  pros- 
perous for  the  cotton  industry  in  the  country  up  to  that  time  (Cope- 

4 


50  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [156 

portion  of  slaves  in  the  ten  cotton  States  was  greater  in 
i860  than  in  1850,85  the  border  States  showed  a  positive  in- 
crease in  number  of  slaves,  cotton  planters  of  the  older  sec- 
tions gave  themselves  to  breeding  slaves  for  the  Texas 
market,86  and  the  amount  of  cultivated  land  increased  16.4 
per  cent.87  The  cotton  crop  of  1859-1860  was  the  largest 
to  that  time,  being  in  excess  of  two  billion  bales.88 

No  distincter  picture  of  the  growing  trend  in  the  South 
away  from  balanced  economic  development  can  be  wished 
than  that  presented  by  the  series  of  commercial  conventions 
held  in  the  fifteen  year9  preceding  the  Civil  War.  The 
1845  meeting,  in  Memphis,  did  not  allow  the  recording  of 
a  proposition  that  the  seat  of  government  be  removed  to  a 
place  west  of  the  Alleghanies,  and  passed  a  resolution  af- 
firming that  the  convention  "  far  from  desiring  to  engender 
sectional  prejudice  .  .  .  regard  the  North  and  the  South, 
the  East  and  the  West,  as  one  people,  in  sympathy  and  in 
interest,  as  in  government  and  country " ;  in  accordance 
with  the  purpose  to  build  up  the  South,  the  questions 
brought  before  the  convention  were  at  first  of  a  practical 
nature,  concerning  commerce,  manufactures  and  education. 
Gradually,  however,  border  States  ceased  to  send  dele- 
gates, and  the  conventions  were  dominated  by  the  political 
aims  of  the  cotton  belt,  with  politicians,  rather  than  men  of 
affairs,  as  spokesmen.  Such  practical  measures  as  were 
discussed  were  on  lines  too  broad  to  be  capable  of  realiza- 
tion. They  were  such  proposals  as  made  resolutions  rather 
than  results.  The  South,  so  far  as  she  sought  industrial 
advancement,  was  in  a  maze,  a  novice  not  knowing  to  what 
projects  to  lend  strength,  never  thinking  of  looking  inward 
and  never  willing  to  start  with  homely  enterprises  that  are 
suggested  by  genuine  recognition  of   economic  needs.     It 

land,  pp.  73-74).  Following  opening  of  railway  communication  after 
1850,  which  brought  in  outside  manufactures,  "  the  home  industry 
was,  as  a  whole,  distinctly  less  successful"  (Thompson,  p.  31). 

85  Hammond,  pp.  60-61. 

86  Ibid.,  p.  59. 

87  Ibid.,  p.  102,  note  1.     See  table  in  ibid.,  p.  129. 

88  Ibid.,  pp.  73-74- 


157]  THE   BACKGROUND  51 

was  sought  to  secure  the  free  navigation  of  the  Amazon,  to 
make  passage  of  the  Isthmus  at  Tehuantepec,  to  build  a 
railroad  from  the  Mississippi  to  the  Pacific,  to  secure  the 
introduction  of  slavery  into  Central  America,  to  remove 
obstacles  to  filibustering  plans  in  Nicaragua.  Through  the 
discussions  in  successive  years  at  Charleston,  New  Orleans, 
Richmond,  Savannah,  Knoxville,  Montgomery  and  Vicks- 
burg  the  tendency  toward  politics  grew ;  rather  forced  pro- 
nouncements of  belief  in  the  Union  carried  implication 
against  their  sincerity,  and  were  mocked  by  speedy  develop- 
ment of  wrangles  over  the  tariff  into  open  use  of  the  word 
"  secession."  "  Hail  Columbia  "  might  be  played  at  a  ban- 
quet, but  response  was  given  to  a  toast,  "The  District  of 
Columbia,  the  'battleground  for  Southern  institutions.'* 
Washington,  and  not  the  Southern  States,  drew  the  eye 
of  all.89 

89  See  Ingle,  p.  221  ff.  "...  in  all  that  they  said  there  was  an 
undertone  of  disappointment  and  apprehension.  They  wished  to 
take  part,  but  could  not,  in  what  was  going  forward  in  the  rest  of 
the  country.  They  spoke  hopefully  of  national  enterprise,  but  it 
was  evident  that  the  nation  of  which  they  were  thinking  .  .  .  was 
not  the  same  nation  that  the  Northern  man  had  in  mind  when  he 
thought  of  the  future  of  industry"  (Woodrow  Wilson,  Division  and 
Reunion,  p.  164).  Cf.  Scherer,  p.  204.  Cassius  M.  Clay  in  a  speech 
in  1856  relentlessly  pointed  out  the  futility  of  all  the  plans  proposed : 
"  If  there  are  not  manufactures,  there  is  no  commerce.  In  vain  dj> 
the  slaveholders  go  to  Knoxville,  to  Nashville,  to  Memphis  and  to 
Charleston,  and  resolve  that  they  will  have  nothing  to  do  with  these 
abolition  eighteen  millions  of  Northern  people ;  that  they  will  build 
their  own  vessels,  manufacture  their  own  goods,  ship  their  own 
products  to  foreign  countries,  and  break  down  New- York,  Philadel- 
phia and  Boston !  Again  they  resolve  and  resolve,  and  yet  there  is 
not  a  single  more  ton  shipped  and  not  a  single  article  added  to  the 
wealth  of  the  South.  But  .  .  .  they  never  invite  such  men  as  I  am 
to  attend  their  Conventions.  They  know  that  I  would  tell  them  that 
slavery  is  the  cause  of  their  poverty,  and  that  I  will  tell  them  that 
what  they  are  aiming  at  is  the  dissolution  of  the  Union.  .  .  .  They 
well  know  that  by  slave  labor  the  very  propositions  which  they  make 
can  never  be  realized ;  yet  when  we  show  these  things,  they  cry  out, 
'Oh,  Cotton  is  King!"'  (quoted  in  Helper,  pp.  206-207).  An  ob- 
servation of  Sir  Horace  Plunkett  with  respect  to  Irish  leaders  is 
peculiarly  applicable  here,  if  Irish  nationalism  be  understood  as 
paralleling  true  Southern  economic  needs : "...  I  always  felt  that 
an  Irish  night  in  the  House  of  Commons  was  one  of  the  strangest 
and  most  pathetic  of  spectacles.  There  were  the  veterans  of  the 
Irish  party  hardened  by  a  hundred  fights,  ranging  from  Venezuela 
to  the  Soudan  in  search  of  battlefields,  making  allies  of  every  kind 


52  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        (^ 1 58 

The  'bias  of  these  last  ante-bellum  years,  lashed  to  pas- 
sion by  a  guilty  sectional  conscience,  or  made  more  wild  by 
the  lack  of  any  connected  thinking,  precluded  even  the  pos- 
sibility of  industrialism.  When  a  gambler  on  the  verge  of 
ruin  is  desperately  playing  his  last  cards  he  has  no  time  to 
reflect  on  past  errors  of  judgment,  and  no  inclination  to 
think  of  better  methods  than  the  fortunes  of  chance  by 
which  to  repair  a  pocket  that  likely  momentarily  will  be 
emptied.90  What  did  not  occur  to  the  leaders  did  not  rise 
in  the  thoughts  of  the  people.91 

Industrialism  and  the  growth  of  cities  are  closely  con- 
nected, yet  in  the  decade  of  the  fifties  the  advance  in  popu- 
lation of  representative  Southern  cities  was  tardy  as  con- 
trasted with  the  North  and  West.92 

It  has  been  noticed  earlier  that  before  the  war  even  agri- 
culture was  carried  on  with  the  roughest,  least  efficient 
tools,  such  as  the  "scooter,"  the  "bull-tongue,"  the  scraper, 
the  sweep  and  hoe.93  It  is  found  that  as  late  as  1880  patents 
issued  to  Southerners  were  for  devices  to  be  employed  on 

of  foreign  potentate,  from  President  Cleveland  to  the  Mahdi,  from 
Mr.  Kruder,  to  the  Akhoom  of  Swat,  but  looking  with  suspicion 
upon  every  symptom  of  an  independent  national  movement  in  Ire- 
land ;  masters  of  the  language  of  hate  and  scorn,  yet  mocked  by 
inevitable  and  eternal  failure;  winners  of  victories  that  turn  to  dust 
and  ashes,  devoted  to  their  country,  yet,  from  ignorance  of  the  real 
source  of  the  malady,  ever  widening  the  gaping  wound  through 
which  its  life-blood  flows.  .  .  .  Irishmen  have  been  long  in  realizing 
that  .  .  .  there  are  battles  for  Ireland  to  be  fought  and  won  in  Ire- 
land "  (p.  91  ff.). 

90  " .  .  .  the  Irish  mind  has  been  in  regard  to  economics,  politics, 
and  even  some  phases  of  religious  influence,  a  mind  warped  and 
diseased,  deprived  of  good  nutrition  and  fed  on  fancies  or  fictions, 
out  of  which  no  genuine  growth,  industrial  or  other  was  possible  " 
(Plunkett,  pp.  122-123). 

91  At  the  height  of  this  period  Helper  wrote :  " .  .  .  the  stupid  and 
sequacious  masses,  the  white  victims  of  slavery  .  .  .  believe,  what- 
ever the  slaveholders  tell  them ;  and  thus  it  is  that  they  are  cajoled 
into  the  notion  that  they  are  the  freest,  happiest  and  most  intelligent 
people  in  the  world,  and  are  taught  to  look  with  prejudice  and  dis- 
approbation upon  every  new  principle  or  progressive  movement. 
Thue  it  is  that  the  South,  woefully  inert  and  inventionless,  has  lagged 
behind  the  North,  and  is  now  weltering  in  the  cesspool  of  ignorance 
and  degradation"  (pp.  44-45.     Cf.  Page,  pp.  22-23). 

92  Ingle,  pp.  14-15. 

93  Cf.  Hammond,  pp.  77-78.     Cf.  George,  pp.  522-523. 


1 59J  THE   BACKGROUND  53 

•the  farm  or  in  the  home  rather  than  in  mechanical  pursuits, 
thus  arguing  against  any  considerable  industrial  tradition 
or  stirrings  before  that  date.94 

Gregg  warned  the  South  that  as  surely  as  she  separated 
from  the  Union,  she  would  find  herself  economically  un- 
equipped to  maintain  her  position.  His  words  were  real- 
ized with  bitter  force.  The  trial  of  the  war  showed  how 
far  industry  had  been  neglected.  It  tore  away  in  an  instant 
a  veil  of  fiction,  and  showed  deplorable  fact  beneath.  Not 
even  the  immediate  needs  of  an  army,  in  munitions  and 
ordnance,  could  be  met  within  the  South.  Clothing  for 
soldiery  and  people  was  lacking,  shipyards  were  small; 
transportation  was  insufficient.  When  cotton  could  no 
longer  bring  in  the  manufactures  of  others,  the  South  was 
left  without  essentials.95 

It  has  been  seen  how  lacking  was  the  ante-bellum  South 
in  any  industrial  character,  and  how  some  tendencies  in  this 
direction,  showing  themselves  in  the  years  just  before  the 
outbreak  of  conflict,  were  choked  off  or  perverted  by  polit- 
ical motive  in  the  rapidly  growing  hostility  to  the  North. 
The  Civil  War,  which  brought  into*  glaring  view  the  ab- 
sence  of    Southern   economic   self-sufficiency,  cleared   the 

94  Under  date  of  Nov.  14,  1882,  the  patent  for  a  loom  shuttle  was 
issued  to  D.  A.  Willbanks,  High  Shoals,  Ga.,  but  this  is  the  only 
invention  connected  with  cotton  manufacturing  revealed  by  a 
search  of  patent  lists  for  many  weeks  (Baltimore  Journal  of  Com- 
merce and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Nov.  18,  1882).  Typical  lists  of 
patents  issued  in  the  same  year  to  Southerners  show :  cultivator,  saw 
gin  filing  machine,  vehicle  wheel,  quilting  attachment  for  sewing 
machines,  rotary  engine,  couch,  combined  cotton-planter  and  fer- 
tilizer-distributor, grate  feeder,  paint,  devices  for  holding  the  fingers 
in  writing,  hoe,  animal  trap,  bottle  washer,  automatic  fly  can,  spoke 
socket,  cotton  chopper,  coffee  roaster,  revolving  plow,  bread  cutter, 
etc.  (ibid.,  Sept.  26,  1882,  and  Nov.  4,  1882). 

95  "  The  story  of  manufactures  in  the  South  from  i860  to  1865  is  a 
record  of  the  efforts  of  a  people,  deprived  in  large  measure  of  the 
materials  that  satisfy  their  needs,  to  supply  themselves  without  pre- 
vious preparation  with  the  equipment  of  war  and  the  resources  of 
peace"  (Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  pp.  330-331). 
Cf.  Scherer,  p.  260,  note;  R.  D.  Stewart,  "firearms  of  the  Con- 
federacy," in  Magazine  of  Antique  Firearms,  Dec,  191 1;  Tompkins, 
Tariff,  p.  5 ;  Thompson,  p.  55 ;  ibid.,  p.  44.  It  is  significant  that  the 
exigency  was  met  only  by  leaning  heavily  upon  domestic  household 
production.     See  above,  p.  35. 


54  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE    SOUTH        [l60 

fevered,  suffocating  atmosphere  like  an  electric  storm.  Mis- 
conceived sectional  political  ambition  and  fierce  protest  had 
ridden  to  a  fall;  talent  and  energy  theretofore  absorbed  to 
such  ends  were  freed  for  wholesome  introspection  and  ma- 
terial upbuilding.  The  Civil  War  set  at  rest  the  political 
inconclusiveness  of  the  Union,  which  had  operated  so  harm- 
fully for  the  South.  The  political  bee,  which  had  been  en- 
couraged to  buzz  in  the  Southern  bonnet  by  the  planter  par- 
ticularism, was  silenced.96  This  was  the  first  condition  of 
economic  advance.  Besides  the  negative  effect  of  the  war, 
through  the  issue  of  the  struggle  the  South  was  drawn  into 
the  national  life,  and  thu9  was  given  positive  stimulus 
through  the  industrial  example  of  the  North  and  East.97 

With  the  removal  of  political  obsession  vanished  its  co- 
hort, slavery;  slavery  gone,  it  not  only  became  apparent 
that  the  South  had  to  change  tactics,  but  that  it  could 
change  tactics.  Thus  practical  pointings  were  not  more 
powerful  than  mental  consequents — not  just  the  slaves,  but 
the  South  as  a  whole  was  emancipated.98 

96  Southerners  "now  renewed  once  and  for  all  time  their  allegiance 
to  the  Union  which  had  up  to  that  time  been  an  experiment,  a  gov- 
ernment of  uncertain  powers "  (Dodd,  Expansion  and  Conflict,  p. 
328). 

97 "  The  planter  culture,  the  semi-feudalism  of  the  '  old  South ' 
was  annihilated,  while  the  industrial  and  financial  system  of  the 
East  was  triumphant.  .  .  .  the  east  was  the  mistress  of  the  United 
States,  and  the  social  and  economic  ideals  of  that  section  were  to  be 
stamped  permanently  upon  the  country"  (ibid.,  p.  328.  On  the  non- 
industrial  quality  of  the  ante-bellum  South,  see  also  ibid.,  pp.  214- 
215).  After  emancipation,  "the  Southern  people  felt  themselves  in 
the  throes  of  an  economic  revolution  leading  to  a  future  of  diver- 
sified industries.  The  old  sentiment  in  favor  of  agriculture  sur- 
vived ;  but  faith  in  it  as  the  sole  support  of  a  nation  was  disappear- 
ing. The  wealth  and  power  which  the  North  had  derived  from 
manufactures  was  better  appreciated"  (Clark,  in  South  in  Building 
of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  p.  254). 

98  As  will  be  seen  later,  new  opportunities  and  duties  did  not 
break  on  the  South  with  full  force  at  first.  What  the  war  made 
possible,  however,  is  seen  in  the  following  striking  statement  of  a 
Southern  periodical  some  years  afterward :  "...  it  has  been  a  very 
common  thing  ...  we  all  know,  for  one  generation  after  another 
in  southern  cities  ...  to  beguile  the  monotony  of  their  humdrum 
life  with  rosy  day-dreams  of  a  far-off  greatness  that  has  been  always 
coming  but  has  never  come.  At  last,  however,  since  the  annihilation 
of  the  institution  of  slavery,  the  new  awakening  of  the  world  under 


l6l~]  THE   BACKGROUND  55 

It  will  be  seen  in  a  later  chapter,  in  examining  the  wide- 
spread building  of  cotton  mills,  how  completely  the  South 
was  altered  in  economic  outlook  after  the  Civil  War.  Not 
the  least  satisfactory  evidence  of  this  changed  character  is 
in  the  frank  avowal  of  it  by  Southerners  on  every  hand. 
The  war  was  in  Southern  economic  history  a  watershed. 
In  1882  a  publisher  in  the  heart  of  the  South  could  say: 
"The  old  sectional  spirit  is  dying  out.  You  can  find  few 
men  now  who  hold  the  narrow  views  of  former  years."99 

The  newness  of  cotton  manufacture,  as  of  industry  gen- 
erally, to  the  post-bellum  South  is  evidenced  in  the  type  of 
enterprisers  who  entered  the  field  when  its  opportunities 
were  understood.  There  were  few  experienced  men  upon 
whom  to  rely ;  it  is  safe  to  say  that  after  the  war  more  of 
the  men  projecting  cotton  mills  came  from  any  one  of  the 
accustomed  callings  of  agriculture,  commerce  and  the  pro- 
fessions than  from  industry.100    Before  the  war  such  propa- 

the  intelligent  energies  of  an  age  of  unprecedented  progress,  the 
delusive  mirage  now  disappears ;  and  the  desert  of  hope  in  the  South 
begins  truly  to  grow  green  with  ...  a  harvest  that  is  really  ripening 
before  the  impoverished  people  who  have  so  long  been  looking  for  it 
and  have  been  so  drearily  disappointed.  ...  At  last  we  know  that 
the  South  need  no  longer  be  nodding,  and  dreaming,  and  drooping, 
over  the  faded  hopes  that  have  for  ages  attended  her  traditions ;  but, 
under  the  auspices  of  a  new  order  of  things,  that  her  people  have  to 
go  on  only  a  little  further  with  the  same  heroic  endurance  and  the 
same  brave  energies  now  characterizing  them,  to  realize  in  all  its 
fullness  and  all  its  force  the  great  established  and  imperishable  fact 
that  the  old  Slave  States  of  the  Union — themselves  emancipated 
from  the  industrial  incubus  of  an  institution  which  contracted  their 
spirit  of  enterprise,  enfeebled  their  energies,  and  smothered  all  their 
industries  except  that  of  agriculture, — are  now  at  last  standing 
straight  and  strong,  with  a  cheering  consciousness  of  their  native 
power  in  the  bounties  God  has  given  them.  .  .  ."  (Industrial  South, 
Richmond,  quoted  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Mfgrs. 
Record,  June  17,  1882).  Cf.  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation, 
vol.  vi,  p.  254,  and  Grady,  p.  270.  Tompkins  said  of  one  community 
now  noted  for  its  manufactures,  "  The  effect  of  emancipation  upon 
all  classes  of  industrial  life  was  immediate  and  revolutionary,"  and 
attributed  the  interest  in  factories  chiefly  to  abolition  of  slavery 
(History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  i,  p.  150.     Cf.  ibid.,  pp.  151,  194-106). 

99  Patrick  Walsh,  of  Augusta  Chronicle,  quoted  in  Journal  of 
Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Sept.  30,  1882. 

100  See  Goldsmith,  pp.  7-8;  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation, 
vol.  vi,  pp.  266-267;  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features, 
p.  180;  and  the  present  writer,  in  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore, 
May  10,  1917. 


56  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON   MILLS  IN   THE   SOUTH       \_\62 

gandists  as  DeBow,  hammering  away  in  his  Review  for 
railways,  cotton  manufactures  and  direct  trade  with  Europe, 
were  pitifully  in  the  minority.  After  the  war,  such  adher- 
ents of  the  old  order  as  Bledsoe  ridiculed  industrialism  in 
vain ;  warnings  against  making  the  "  New  South  "  only  an- 
other North  made  small  appeal  to  thinking  men  who  cher- 
ished precisely  this  ambition.101 

How  great  is  the  temptation  to  conceive  and  attempt  to 
carry  through  political  and  social  reforms  which  are  really 
contingent  upon  economic  reorganization,  is  nowhere  more 
clearly  seen  than  in  the  period  of  Reconstruction  in  the 
South.  These  years,  filled  with  the  clamor  of  jealousy  and 
vindictiveness  and  hurt  and  passion  and  greed  needed  so 
much  of  wisdom  and  patience  and,  above  all,  work.  For- 
tunately, economic  processes  by  some  magic  can  usually, 
however  uncertainly,  go  forward  in  spite  of  every  political 
hindrance;  the  South,  if  hearing  with  one  ear  insults  from 
without,  listened  with  the  other  to  voices  from  within.  The 
degree  of  distraction  and  torment  of  Reconstruction  tes- 
tifies to  the  strength  of  purpose  with  which  the  South  at- 
tended to  her  own  best  promptings.  It  may  even  be  held, 
perhaps,  that  Reconstruction,  in  a  certain  point  of  view, 
wa9  of  positive  assistance  in  nurturing  the  mind  for  indus- 
trial beginnings.  There  was  no  question  but  that  the  South 
was  exhausted  and  was  being  drained  of  all  but  self-respect ; 
she  was  humbled  beyond  compassion.  Former  slaves  were 
apparently  becoming  masters.  As  a  participant  in  national- 
ity, in  appreciation  of  broad  social  policies,  the  South  knew 
that  she  had  made  a  terrible  failure.  The  fierce  pride  of 
the  first  war  years  had  waned  into  the  hopeless,  dogged  re- 
sistance of  the  days  before  Appomattox  and  flickered  out  in 
the  degradation  that  followed.  During  Reconstruction  the 
South,  like  a  man  thrown  into  prison,  had  time  to  reflect 
on  past  sins.    Though  perhaps  it  was  not  admitted  in  word, 

101  See  Dodd,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  p.  546.  For 
an  excellent  account  of  post-bellum  activity  as  contrasted  with  ante- 
bellum quiescence,  see  Tompkins,  History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  i,  pp. 
150-151,  194-196;  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  pp. 
262-263. 


163]  THE   BACKGROUND  57 

it  was  soon  to  foe  shown  in  deed  that  the  South  understood 
the  part  that  slavery  had  played.  A  new  course  must  surely 
thenceforth  foe  adopted.  In  Reconstruction  the  South  found 
itself.  Not  without  the  material  assistance  and  more  gen- 
erous view  that  came  through  agency  of  Northern  men  who 
in  this  period  learned  to  know  the  industrial  opportunities 
of  the  section  and  were  willing  to  contribute  toward  its  de- 
velopment, it  was  still  primarily  a  change  of  heart  which 
the  South  experienced.  In  the  face  of  a  freed  negro  popu- 
lation, the  idea  of  work  first  seriously  presented  itself  to  the 
Southern  white  mind. 

Lack  of  tangible  evidences  of  this  psychological  change 
should  not  hinder  understanding  of  its  presence.  During 
Reconstruction  little  that  was  practical  could  be  done,  but 
how  earnestly  the  South  had  been  introspecting  and  plan- 
ning is  splendidly  apparent  in  the  suddenness  and  vigor 
with  which  industrial  development  commenced  once  im- 
pediments were  removed.102 

It  will  be  seen  later  that  no  agency  bore  a  larger  part  in 
the  rise  of  cotton  mills  in  the  South  than  the  News  and 
Courier,  of  Charleston.  It  is  therefore  important  to  know 
that,  according  to  a  statement  made  by  the  paper  in  1880,  on 
the  very  eve  of  the  great  development,  its  philosophy  of 

102  Mr.  Clark  has  well  called  Reconstruction  "  a  germinal  period 
for  manufactures."  For  a  sympathetic  interpretation  of  the  mean- 
ing of  Reconstruction  years,  see  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Na- 
tion, vol.  vi,  pp.  254-255,  262-263,  265-266.  Grady  wrote  in  1889, 
speaking  principally  of  the  period  of  Reconstruction :  "  For  twenty- 
five  years  the  industrial  forces  of  the  South  have  been  at  work 
under  the  surface.  Making  little  show,  experimenting,  working  out 
new  ways,  peering  about  with  the  lamp  of  experience  barely  lit,  dig- 
ging, delving,  struggling,  until  at  last  the  day  has  come,  and  inde- 
pendence is  proclaimed.  Now  watch  the  change  take  place  with  al- 
most comical  swiftness  "  (p.  270) .  One  cannot'  but  second  the  ap- 
peal of  Professor  Sioussat :  "  The  political  history  of  reconstruction 
has  been  narrated  from  many  points  of  view,  .  .  .  but  the  vast  social 
and  economic  changes,  which  beginning  in  the  reconstruction  time 
are  still  in  progress,  usually  receive  in  our  text-books  less  attention. 
Our  girls  and  boys  study  carefully  the  work  of  the  Gracchi,  the 
organization  of  the  medieval  manor  .  .  .  and  the  condition  of  the 
peasants  in  France  before  the  revolution.  Is  it  not  possible  to 
awaken  an  intelligent  interest  in  the  tasks  with  which  emancipation 
and  the  industrial  revolution  have  confronted  the  people  of  the 
South?"  (p.  223). 


58  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH       [164 

manufactures  had  been  conceived  in  the  thick  of  Reconstruc- 
tion. "  Ten  years  ago,"  it  was  said,  "  The  News  and  Cour- 
ier formulated  what  is  now  an  accepted  truth,  in  declaring 
that  the  remedy  for  commercial  distress  in  the  North  and 
the  secret  of  sure  fortune  in  the  South  was  to  bring  the  mills 
to  the  cotton."  The  thought  was  not  balked  by  the  small 
success  of  ante-bellum  factories,  one  of  which,  established 
in  Charleston  long  before  the  war,  was  at  the  date  of  this 
writing  "in  the  irony  of  fate,  the  City  Alms-House";  nor 
was  it  unassisted  by  the  presence  of  men  in  the  State  "who 
understood  that  large  profits  could  be  made  by  well-man- 
aged cotton  factories."  There  were  at  the  close  of  the  con- 
flict such  mills  as  Graniteville  and  Batesville  which  were 
gaining  reputation,  and  another  important  venture  was  being 
projected.  Around  these  a  body  of  thought,  favorable  to 
manufactures,  and  new  to  the  South,  grew  up,  and  "the 
expectation  of  profit,  which  in  those  days  had  something  of 
a  theoretical  basis,"  was  by  1880  able  to  stand  upon  "  a 
solid  foundation,  supported  by  .  .  .  indisputable  and  con- 
vincing facts.  .  .  ."103 

103  peb  I0>  1880.  A  South  Carolinian,  reminded  of  the  cotton 
mill  boom  of  the  early  eighties,  led  by  the  press,  said  "  the  South 
had  begun  to  develop  and  revive  before  1880.  The  papers  probably 
stressed  a  program  which  they  had  already  seen  started "  (M.  L. 
Bonham,  interview,  Anderson,  S.  C,  Sept.  10,  1916).  "No  appre- 
ciable break  occurred  in  the  continuity  of  cotton  manufactures  in 
the  South,  in  spite  of  the  mills  destroyed  or  closed  by  the  war.  Be- 
fore 1870  several  of  the  ruined  factories  had  been  rebuilt,  and  long 
prior  to  that  others  had  resumed  operations.  ...  In  1868  .  .  .  there 
were  sixty-nine  mills  ...  in  operation  south  of  the  Ohio  and  Po- 
tomac. .  .  .  By  1870  Southern  mill  owners  were  confident  they  could 
make  yarn  five  cents  a  pound  cheaper  than  the  Northern  factories  " 
(Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  pp.  254-255).  Cf. 
ibid.,  pp.  262-263.  The  News  and  Courier  declared  that  "  nothing 
did  more  to  show  the  practical  advantages  of  a  cotton  producing 
State  in  this  matter  than  the  calculation  made  and  published  a  num- 
ber of  years  ago  by  the  President  of  the  Saluda  Factory,  which 
showed  by  actual  figures  that  South  Carolina  mills  could  sell  ordi- 
nary yarns  in  New  York  at  the  price  which  it  cost  the  mills  in  New 
England  to  make  these  yarns,  and  still  realize  a  considerable  profit " 
(ibid.).  See  a  list  of  mills  in  operation  in  South  Carolina  two 
years  after  the  war,  published  in  an  almanac  of  Joseph  Walker, 
Charleston,  quoted  in  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  South  Carolina,  p.  19. 
With  reference  to  the  fifteen  years  following  the  war,  see  Thomp- 
son, p.  59  ff.    For  a  sketch  of  the  career  of  H.  P.  Hammett,  typical 


165]  THE   BACKGROUND  59 

We  may  leave  now  the  period  of  Reconstruction,  with  its 
formative  influences,  and  come  to  the  evidence  bespeaking 
material  proof  of  industrial  beginnings  after  political  hin- 
drances were  removed,  economic  strength  was  being  re- 
gained and  the  South  could  concentrate  on  its  task  of 
manufactures.104  The  Southern  States,  though  regaining 
self -government  generally  about  1876,  did  not  get  economic 
freedom  of  action  with  political  rights.  Later,  in  another 
connection,  it  will  be  shown  how  the  issue  of  the  Hayes- 
Tilden  presidential  election  helped  to  delay  for  four  years 
industrial  beginnings.  But  aside  from  this,  waving  the 
wand  of  civic  independence  could  not  produce  cotton  mills 
immediately  from  a  magic  hat.  Additional  years  of  recov- 
ery were  necessary,  years  far  from  idle,  but  not  marked 
by  widespread  activity.  The  war  saw  a  fevered  South  com- 
pletely stricken ;  during  radical  rule  the  victim  lay  on  a  bed 
of  torture;  while  convalescent  after  1876,  the  patient  did 
not  comence  to  sit  up  and  take  solid  food  until  about  1880. 

There  is  every  reason  for  selecting  the  year  1880  as  the 
beginning  of  cotton  manufacturing  development  in  the 
South.  Negatively,  foregoing  pages  have  shown  that  it  did 
not  exist,  in  a  proper  sense,  earlier.  Remaining  parts  of 
this  study  will  exhibit  very  positive  evidences  of  alertness 
and  progress  after  that  date.  Though  there  are  material 
bases  for  grounding  the  genesis  in  the  year  1880,  it  is  not 
meant  to  insist  dogmatically  upon  this  precise  point  of  time. 

of  the  South  Carolinians  who  after  the  war  understood  that  a  profit 
could  be  made  from  well-managed  cotton  mills,  and  who  in  the 
sixties  and  seventies  was  mayor  of  Greenville,  a  member  of  the 
House  of  Representatives,  a  railroad  president  and  mill  builder,  see 
Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  pp.  180-190.  Renewal 
of  cotton  manufacturing  in  the  South  closely  following  disappear- 
ance of  slavery  was  generally  on  old  lines  and  with  old  machinery, 
but  Hammett's  Piedmont  Factory  was  "  designed,  built  and  equipped 
after  strictly  modern  plans"   (ibid.). 

104 "  "While  some  retrospect  is  necessary  [in  studying  the  history 
of  the  New  South]  the  period  .  .  .  covered  is  principally  that  which 
began  with  the  close  of  the  reconstruction  era,  at  the  time  when  the 
South  was  permitted  once  more  to  exercise  self-government,  and 
when  some  progress  had  been  made  toward  repairing  the  economic 
losses  of  the  war"  (Sioussat,  pp.  223,  228).  Cf.  Tompkins,  Tariff, 
P-  3- 


60  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        \_l66 

Certainly,  however,  much  in  the  way  of  convenience  would 
be  sacrificed  by  choosing  1879  or  1881.  Writers  touching 
the  subject,  whether  careful  students  or  casual  comimen^ 
tators,  have  very  generally  selected  this  date  as  the  initiation 
of  the  cotton  mill  era.105 

105  «  The  scope  of  the  history  of  Southern  progress  along  indus- 
trial lines  is  embraced  mostly  within  the  last  twenty-five  years  "  (T. 
C.  Guthrie,  in  Proceedings,  7th  Annual  Convention,  Southern  Cotton 
Spinners'  Assn.,  1903,  p.  44).  See  this  and  following  pages  for  an 
extraordinarily  good  interpretation  of  stages  antecedent  to  the  rise 
of  the  mills.  The  suddenness  with  which  development  began  is  indi- 
cated :  "  If  some  soothsayer  .  .  .  twenty-five  years  ago  .  .  .  had 
essayed  to  predict  what  the  South  would  accomplish  in  industrial 
development  .  .  .  and  particularly  in  cotton  manufacturing;  if  he 
had  foretold  the  hundreds  of  millions  of  capital  that  would  be  in- 
vested ;  the  number  of  mills ;  the  number  of  spindles ;  .  .  .  the  quan- 
tity of  cotton  consumed  each  year ;  the  number  of  operatives ;  the 
value  of  the  annual  output — if  he  had  prophesied  concerning  the 
meeting  here  today,  the  capital,  labor,  values  and  territory  repre- 
sented here,  he  would  have  been  set  down  as  a  dreamer  of  dreams." 
Another  speaker  at  the  same  convention  referred  to  slavery  as  turn- 
ing back  the  clock  of  progress,  which,  however,  started  ticking  off 
industrial  advance  after  1880  (Averill,  ibid.,  pp.  123-124).  Noticing 
the  decrease  in  price  of  cotton  from  1870  to  1879  from  23  to  10  cents, 
the  growing  impatience  with  unreliable  freed  negroes,  the  movement 
of  people  of  means  to  the  cities  and  willingness  to  invest  in  other 
things  than  mortgages,  Mr.  Thompson  assumed  the  same  date  of 
commencement  (p.  59  ff.).  Cf.  E.  C.  Brooks,  Story  of  Cotton,  p. 
215.  Professor  Brooks  prefers  1880  as  the  date  of  the  Southern 
economic  renaissance  (interview,  Durham,  N.  C,  Sept.  18,  1916), 
and  his  Story  of  Cotton  shows  this  clearly,  as,  e.g.,  "  It  was  in  1880 
.  .  .  that  the  Southern  states  turned  seriously  to  manufacturing  cot- 
ton" (p.  261)  ;  he  gives  a  table  from  which  he  says  "It  is  apparent 
.  .  .  that  the  real  factory  life  in  the  South  dates  from  1880  ...  ;" 
"...  a  new  era  started  in  the  South  about  1880  .  .  ."  (p.  257)  ; 
"  The  whole  civilization  of  the  South  had  been  overturned,  ...  a 
new  era  in  regard  to  the  value  of  skilled  labor  and  personal  worth 
was  taking  the  place  of  the  old  notions  .  .  .  and  we  have  the  begin- 
ning of  the  factory  system  in  the  South"  (pp.  255-256).  Mr.  Gold- 
smith calls  the  year  1880  "epoch-marking"  and  declares  it  "marks 
the  turning  point  in  the  development  of  modern  cotton  factories  in 
the  South.  ...  A  new  era  dawned"  (pp.  4-5).  Tompkins  related 
the  third  period  in  Southern  population  history  to  "  the  industrial 
expansion  which  grew  from  the  business  revival  .  .  .  following  the 
war,"  and  quoted  figures  from  1880  (History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol. 
r)  P-  !97)-  Murphy  put  stress  upon  a  psychological  reversal  which 
argued  industrialism :  "  About  the  year  1880  the  long-waited  change 
begins.  By  1890  the  industrial  revival  is  in  evident  progress.  By 
1900  the  South  had  entered  upon  one  of  the  most  remarkable  periods 
of  economic  development  to  be  found  in  the  history  of  the  modern 
industrial  world"  (pp.  101-102).  "From  the  ashes  and  ruins  left 
by  the  war  a  '  new  South '  has  emerged.    Between  the  cessation  of 


i67] 


THE   BACKGROUND  6  I 


Innumerable  evidences  of  the  newness  of  the  South  to 
cotton  manufacture  in  1880  crop  out,  making  it  clear  that 
united  building  of  mills  cannot  be  placed  before  that  date. 


hostilities  and  the  beginning  of  this  development,  a  period  of  fifteen 
years,  the  South  had  slowly  recovered  from  the  losses  which  it  had 
suffered.  .  .  .  The  cotton  manufacturing  industry  has  grown  up  in 
the  South  .  .  .  since  1880"  (Copeland,  pp.  32,  34).  "The  revolu- 
tion, .  .  .  the  evolution  on  the  '  double  quick,'  began  about  1880  in 
South  Carolina.  .  .  ."  (Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  20).  Cf. 
ibid.,  pp.  18-19.  "  One  of  the  most  remarkable  features  in  the  indus- 
trial history  of  the  Southern  States  has  been  the  phenomenal  growth 
of  cotton  manufactures  there  .  .  .;  from  1880-1890  the  number  of 
spindles  increased  twofold  .  .  ,  whilst  in  the  following  decade  the 
growth  was  still  greater.  .  .  ."  (T.  W.  Uttley,  Cotton  Spinning  and 
Manufacturing  in  the  United  States  of  America,  p.  43).  This  selec- 
tion of  1880  is  by  an  English  student.  Some  references  far  from 
studied  are  especially  confirmatory;  often  a  painter  will  half  close 
his  eyes  to  discern  tone  values :  "  United  States  Census  figures  show 
that  since  1880  the  consumption  of  cotton  in  mills  in  the  cotton  grow- 
ing states  has  increased  1,502  per  cent.  .  .  ."  (Advertisement  of 
Southern  Railway  in  Textile  Manufacturer,  Charlotte,  N.  C,  Aug. 
19,  1915).  "In  other  words,  since  1880  the  investment  in  Southern 
cotton  mills  has  increased  from  less  than  fifteen  million  dollars  to 
more  than  three  hundred  and  fifty  million  dollars  "  (John  A.  Law, 
in  Proceedings,  Robert  Morris  Club,  National  Association  of  Credit 
Men,  1916,  pp.  18-19).  Cf.  Henry  D.  Phillips,  in  The  South  Mobil- 
izing for  Social  Service,  p.  566;  Hart,  pp.  224,  232,  242.  "  It  will  be 
seen  that  the  South  has  been  taking  stock  since  1880,  and  that  eco- 
nomic forces  and  influences  are  now  better  understood  than  ever  be- 
fore .  .  ."  (Dodd,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  p.  550). 
"  Mills  were  established  in  Spartanburg  County  first  in  1879  and 
1880  in  numbers.  About  these  years  was  the  first  great  activity.  The 
County  was  crushed  before  1879.  Before  1876  there  was  no  capital, 
and  the  domination  of  the  carpet  bag  government"  (Cleveland,  int., 
Spartanburg).  For  a  looser  statement,  hardly  to  be  taken  in  contra- 
diction, see  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  preface. 
The  year  1880  marks  not  only  the  beginnings  of  cotton  manufactur- 
ing, but  was  signalized  by  recovery  or  new  enterprise  in  other  direc- 
tions. Ante-bellum  cotton  production  of  over  5,000,000  bales  had 
been  reached  again  (Sioussat,  p.  227,  and  News  and  Observer, 
Raleigh,  N.  C,  Sept.  15,  1880)  ;  Tennessee  and  Alabama  boom  towns, 
resting  on  hopes  of  iron  and  steel  manufacture,  came  a  little  later 
(Sioussat,  ibid.)  ;  railroad  development  took  its  rise  (Hart,  p.  227)  ; 
"...  it  was  not  until  amost  1880  that  the  public-school  idea  was 
accepted  as  the  best  solution  of  the  educational  problem"  (U.  S. 
Bureau  of  Education,  Negro  Education,  1917)  ;  furniture  and  vehicle 
factories  appeared  in  the  upland,  hardwood  sections  (Brooks,  p. 
217)  ;  agricultural  method  and  rural  life  began  undergoing  reorgani- 
zation and  betterment  (ibid.,  pp.  221-222)  ;  public  interest  in  cotton 
seed  oil  manufacture  started  with  1882  (Tompkins,  Cotton  and  Cot- 
ton Oil,  pp.  210,  214)  ;  right  of  suffrage  was  withdrawn  from 
illiterate  whites  and  negroes  (ibid.,  p.  64)  ;  as  to  good  roads,  see 
Tompkins,  History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  ii,  p.  213;  the  speculation 


62  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        £l68 

In  this  year  only  one  establishment  in  South  Carolina  was 
located  within  the  corporate  limits  of  a  city.106  Descrip- 
tions of  cotton  manufacturing  processes  had  to  be  of  the 
most  primary  sort,  without  technical  language.107  Lack  of 
specialization  and  even  the  link  with  domestic  industry 
showed  in  at  least  one  conspicuous  instance  as  late  ag^ 
1880.108  How  largely  thought  of  industrial  matters  was 
delayed  until  1880  by  the  issue  of  the  Hayes-Tilden  contest 
will  be  seen  in  detail  later.109  Contributing  to  the  lateness  of 
the  economic  awakening  was  the  fact  that  South  Carolina, 
which  proved  so  strong  in  leadership  when  the  movement 
commenced,  was  one  of  the  last  States  to  be  freed  from 
carpet-bag  rule. 

The  panic  of  1873  and  the  following  depression  may  be 
considered  alone  sufficient  cause  for  the  failure  of  these 
years  to  show  more  industrial  progress  in  the  South. 

From  the  combined  causes  of  war,  paper  money,  and 
scarcity  of  cotton,  the  price  of  the  staple  and  of  manufac- 
turing machinery  soared  to  monstrous  figures,  and  did  not 
return  again  to  the  level  of  i860  until  about  1880.110 

In  a  list  of  the  thirty  cities  having  the  largest  gross  manu- 

of  1879  was  held  to  have  set  in  motion  European  and  American 
spindles  (Commercial  and  Financial  Chronicle,  quoted  in  News  and 
Courier,  Charleston,  Sept.  12,  1881)  ;  "The  cotton-manufacturing 
industry  in  almost  every  part  of  the  world  has  continued  to*  prosper 
during  the  past  twelve  months"  (Financial  and  Commercial  Chron- 
icle, quoted  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers' 
Record,  Sept.  9,  1882)  ;  "  .  .  .  the  sudden  and  wonderful  revival  of 
business  which  took  place  in  the  republic  during  the  last  half  of 
1879  .  .  .  had  the  effect  of  withdrawing  us  from  the  foreign  markets 
to  supply  our  home  demands  "  (American  Rail  and  Export  Journal, 
quoted  in  ibid.,  Aug.  26,  1882). 

106  J.  K.  Blackman,  The  Cotton  Mills  of  South  Carolina,  p.  13. 

107  See  as  to  Clement  Attachment,  Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta, 
Jan.  23,  1880. 

108  In  connection  with  the  Glendale  Factory,  D.  E.  Converse  &  Co. 
operated  a  flouring  mill,  several  gins,  a  saw  and  planing  mill,  and  a 
wool  carding  mill  in  which  upwards  of  10,000  pounds  of  wool  was 
prepared  for  the  country  people  (Blackman,  p.  10). 

109  See  especially,  however,  correspondence  signed  "  Local,"  in 
News  and  Observer,  Raleigh,  N.  C,  Nov.  21,  1880,  and  quotations 
from  New  York  Herald  and  Washington  Post  in  News  and  Courier, 
Charleston,  March  8,  1881. 

110  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1880,  "  Cotton  Manufacture " 
p.  8. 


1 69] 


THE   BACKGROUND 


63 


facturing  product,  the  census  of  1880  enumerated  none  in 
the  South,  unless  Baltimore  and  St.  Louis  be  counted,  and 
in  neither  of  these  did  cotton  manufacture  rank  with  their 
six  principal  industries.111 

Census  figures,  inconclusive  when  examined  for  particular 
aspects  of  the  history  of  the  cotton  manufacture,  show 
strikingly,  when  taken  for  a  considerable  period,  that  the 
Southern  industry  had  its  rise  in  1880.  The  following 
table,  covering  the  years  1850  to  1900  inclusive,  gives  the 
course  of  the  mills  of  the  South  as  exhibited  in  the  most 
salient  features:112 


Year 

Estab. 

Capital 

Opera- 
tives 

Spin. 

Looms 

Lbs.  Cotton 

I9OO 
I89O 
I880 
I870 
i860 
I850 

40I 

239 
I6l 

151 

165 
166 

$124,596,874 
53,821,303 

17,375,897 

11,088,315 

9,840,221 

7,256,056 

97,559 
36,415 
16,741 

io,i73 
10,152 
10,043 

4,299,988 

1,554,000 

542,048 

327,871 

298,551 

IIO,OI5 

36,266 

11,898 

6,256 

8,789 

707,842,111 

250,837,646 

84,528,757 

34,351,195 

45,786,510 

That  1880  was  the  date  of  commencement,  clearly  seen 
in  this  tabulation,  is  also  interestingly  apparent  in  interpre- 
tations of  the  figures  brought  out  in  successive  census  re- 
ports. No  better  picture  of  the  way  in  which  the  Southern 
development  broke  on  the  national  consciousness  can  be  had 
than  by  a  glance  at  some  of  these  comments  seriatim. 

As  has  been  said,  up  to  1880  the  Southern  industry  had 
evidenced  no  extraordinary  or  convincing  advance.  It  is 
natural,  therefore,  to  find  the  census  of  this  year  remarking 
on  the  degree  of  Southern  growth  merely  as  an  extension 
of  the  manufacture,  and  classing  the  Southern  mills  with 
some  new  ones  in  the  West.113 

111  "  Remarks  on  the  Statistics  of  Manufactures,"  p.  xxvii. 

112  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1900,  "  Cotton  Manufactures," 
p.  57.  These  figures,  strictly  taken,  indicate  the  decade,  rather  than 
the  year,  of  commencement  of  striking  growth.  Comments  in  the 
census  and  other  evidence,  however,  fill  in  the  outline  here  pre- 
sented. 

113  "  The  cotton  manufacture  is  almost  monopolized  by  New  Eng- 
land, Massachusetts  alone  producing  to  the  value  of  $74,780,835. 
The  other  New  England  states  produce  in  the  aggregate  about  as 


64  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [17O 

As  will  be  seen  later,  Edward  Atkinson,  of  Boston,  had 
much  to  do  with  rousing  the  South  to  economic  activity. 
However,  he  admitted  Southern  industrial  prospects  only 
when  he  could  not  urge  a  superior  advantage  in  New  Eng- 
land or  when  he  knew  that  to  do  otherwise  would  be  futile. 
His  comments  in  the  census  of  1880  are  interestingly  in- 
dicative oi  his  frame  of  mind.  Dwelling  on  the  new  through 
rail  connections  in  this  country,  he  computed  in  pound- 
cents  the  saving  of  New  England  over  Lancashire  in  raw 
cotton ;  recognizing  that  this  argument  of  relative  proximity 
to  cotton  fields  proved  too  much,  applying  with  greater 
force  to  the  Southern  States,  he  was  obliged  to  say  that  "If 
Georgia  has  twice  the  advantage  over  Lancashire  that  New 
England  now  possesses,  it  will  only  be  the  fault  of  the  peo- 
ple of  Georgia  if  they  do  not  reap  the  benefit  of  it."114  He 
went  on  to  assert,  somewhat  contradictorily,  that  "  The 
charge  for  moving  cotton  is  becoming  less  year  by  year,  and 
it  will  soon  matter  little  where  the  cotton  factory  is  placed, 
so  far  as  distance  between  the  field  and  the  factory  is  con- 
cerned," and  suggested  that  this  allowed  location  of  mills 
so  as  to  utilize  assets  in  climate,  labor,  and  repair  facilities 

much  more.  .  .  ."  And  in  the  list  of  States  producing  in  excess  of 
$2,000,000  each  are  mentioned  Georgia,  Maryland,  New  Jersey,  New 
, /York,  North  Carolina,  Pennsylvania,  South  Carolina  (U.  S.  Census 
*  of  Manufactures,  1880,  "  Remarks  on  the  Statistics  of  Manufac- 
tures," by  Francis  A.  Walker,  pp.  xix-xx).  Two  obvious  advantages 
of  Southern  mills  seemed  to  be  sufficient  cause  for  greater  per- 
centage of  increase  in  that  section  than  in  other  sections.  "... 
tables  indicate  the  rapid  extension  of  the  cotton  manufacture  to  the 
southern  states,  where  the  cotton  is  at  hand  and  labor  is  much 
cheaper  than  at  the  north."  Southern  spindles  increased  from  1870 
to  1880  by  65  +  per  cent,  in  New  England  57  per  cent,  in  the  Middle 
States  11  +  per  cent,  in  the  Western  States  46  -f-  per  cent,  and  in  the 
whole  country  49  -f-  per  cent.  "  It  will  be  seen  that  the  states  of 
Michigan,  Wisconsin,  and  Minnesota  have  been  added  to  the  list  of 
cotton  manufacturing  states  since  1870"  (ibid.,  "  The  Factory  System 
of  the  United  States,"  by  Carroll  D.  Wright,  p.  16).  "After  the 
success  of  the  power  loom  the  cotton  manufacture  took  rapid  strides. 
.  .  .  Factories  sprung  up  on  all  the  streams  of  Yorkshire  and  Lanca- 
shire, .  .  .  while  in  this  country  the  activity  of  the  promoters  .  .  , 
won  cities  from  barren  pastures.  They  erected  Lowell,  Lawrence, 
Holyoke,  Fall  River  .  .  .  and  now  in  this  generation  the  industry 
is  taking  root  upon  the  banks  of  Southern  streams"  (ibid.,  p.  8). 

114  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1880,  "  The  Cotton  Manufac- 
ture," p.  12.    Cf.  p.  13. 


I7l]  THE   BACKGROUND  65 

which  were  possessed  by  New  England ;  that  the  lowest  cost 
of  production  existed  where  wages  were  highest.115 

He  was  fond  of  trying  to  center  the  attention  of  the  South 
on  the  "preparation"  of  cotton  rather  than  on  its  manu- 
facture. Thus  he  declared  that  ginning,  which  must  be  car- 
ried on  among  the  plantations,  "  is  the  most  important  de- 
partment in  the  whole  series  of  operations  to  which  the 
cotton  fiber  must  be  subjected;  and  as  yet  there  has  been 
less  of  science  and  art  .  .  .  applied  to  this  department  than 
to  any  other."  He  exhibited  in  much  detail,  on  the  basis  of 
a  private  investigation  made  before  the  census  year,  the 
careless  and  wasteful  way  in  which  cotton  was  handled  in 
the  Southern  gins  and  "  screws,"  but  was  obliged  to  admit 
that  by  1883,  when  his  report  was  transmitted,  "the  old 
methods,  by  which  the  cotton  has  been  depreciated  after  it 
had  been  picked,  are  rapidly  going  out  of  use."  This  was 
partly  by  agency  of  the  Atlanta  cotton  exposition  of  1881, 
in  which  he  had  been  a  prime  mover,  and  which  it  is  clear 
he  hoped  might  direct  efforts  increasingly  to  the  growing  of 
the  staple  in  the  uplands,  and  the  utilization  of  seed  for  its 
oil  and  food  substances.118 

The  position  taken  in  this  study,  that  the  Southern  cotton 
manufacturing  development  really  began  in  1880,  receives 
striking  justification  in  the  comments  on  the  statistics  of 
the  industry  by  Edward  Stanwood  in  the  census  of  1890. 
In  the  figures  collected  in  this  year  the  Southern  develop- 
ment since  1880,  as  contrasted  with  the  previous  record  of 
the  section,  and  as  compared  with  the  proportionate  ad- 
vance of  other  seats  of  the  manufacture,  was  too  apparent 
to  be  accorded  other  than  frank  avowal,  leading  to  specula- 
tion as  to  chances  of  the  rest  of  the  country  in  maintaining 
accustomed  superiority.  "  The  geographical  distribution  of 
the  cotton  manufacturing  industry  is  an  interesting  study," 
Stanwood  said,  "and  it  is  more  especially  so  at  the  present 
time  by  the  fact  that  during  the  last  ten  years  a  change  has 
been  taking  place,  which,  if  it  should  continue,  will  become 

115  Ibid.,  p.  14.  " 

116  Ibid.,  p.  4  ff. 
5 


66  THE    RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE    SOUTH        [l72 

highly  important."  He  recited  that  from  the  beginning 
New  England)  had  been  chief  in  the  industry,  in  1840  having 
70  per  cent  of  the  spinning  machinery,  in  i860  (spindles 
were  not  taken  in  1850)  74  per  cent,  J  J  per  cent  in  1870, 
and  81  per  cent  in  1880.  The  1890  census,  however,  showed 
for  New  England  a  drop  to  76  per  cent.  In  the  face  of  this 
decrease,  he  enlarged  on  the  steadiness  of  concentration  in 
certain  New  England  districts  and  the  success  with  which 
Massachusetts  alone  had  maintained  its  percentage  of  spin- 
dleage  increase.  But,  in  spite  of  having  added  2,000,000 
spindles,  New  England  was  a  relative  loser  by  nearly  5  per 
cent,  and  for  the  first  time  in  the  census  occurs  the  heading 
"  Growth  in  the  South."    And  it  is  declared : 

In  considering  the  geographical  distribution  of  the  cotton  manu- 
facturing industry  the  most  important  fact  is  the  extraordinary  rate 
of  its  growth  in  the  South  during  the  past  decade.  For  a  great 
many  years,  probably  ever  since  the  cultivation  of  the  cotton  plant 
in  the  South  Atlantic  states  had  a  beginning,  domestic  spinning  and 
weaving  of  coarse  cotton  fabrics  has  been  a  common  fact  in  the 
household  economy  of  that  part  of  the  country.  Here  and  there 
small  factories  were  established  for  the  production  of  heavy  fabrics. 
It  is  only  in  the  period  since  the  close  of  the  civil  war  that  mills  have 
been  erected  in  the  South  for  the  purpose  of  entering  the  general 
market  of  the  country  with  their  merchandise,  and  almost  all  the 
progress  made  in  this  direction  has  been  effected  since  1880. 

It  was  remarked  that  the  1880  census  showed  for  all  the 
States  south  of  the  District  of  Columbia,  only  542,048  spin- 
dles, and  that  had  all  these  been  concentrated  in  one  State 
it  would  have  raised  that  State  only  to  seventh  place  in  point 
of  production  capacity.  "  A  remarkable  development  of 
manufacturing  enterprise  in  the  South,  based  on  the  near- 
ness of  supplies  of  raw  material,  which  began  ten  years  ago, 
had  no  more  reasonable  field  in  which  to  exercise  itself  than 
that  of  cotton  spinning.  New  mills  sprang  up  all  over  the 
region,  but  particularly  in  the  states  of  North  Carolina, 
South  Carolina,  and  Georgia."  In  1890  these  three  States 
reported  75  more  establishments  than  in  1880,  but  even  this 
did  not  indicate  the  increase,  because  some  antiquated  mills 
had  ceased  operation  forever,  and  the  average  number  of 
spindles  to  the  mill  had  advanced  nearly  73  per  cent. 


173]  THE   BACKGROUND  6? 

Quite  as  large  proportionate  increase  had  taken  place  in 
other  Southern  States ;  markets  previously  in  exclusive  pos- 
session of  Northern  mills  had  been  occupied  by  Southern 
products,  finer  goods  were  being  manufactured  and  the 
new  mills  were  "  for  the  most  part  equipped  with  the  latest 
and  most  improved  machinery."  Outstanding  Southern  ad- 
vantages were  partially  offset  by  disadvantages,  "  some  of 
which  time  and  experience  will  cause  to  disappear,"  and,  in 
place  of  Atkinson's  determined  preference  for  New  Eng- 
land, it  was  declared  that  "  It  can  not  be  doubted  that  the 
development  of  this  industry  in  the  cotton-raising  states  is 
based  upon  sound  commercial  reasons,  and  that  it  is  destined 
to  continue."  Increase  of  manufacturing  in  the  Middle 
States  had  been  at  a  slower  rate  than  in  any  other  part  of 
the  country,  and  the  development  in  the.  West,  while  ex- 
hibiting a  good  rate  of  advance,  was  too  small  to  call  for 
extended  notice.  While  it  was  recognized  that  the  future 
growth  of  the  industry,  considered  geographically,  de- 
pended upon  a  variety  of  factors — cheapness  of  transpor- 
tation of  raw  cotton,  nearness  to  markets  for  finished  goods, 
economy  of  power,  supply  of  adaptable  labor,  spirit  of  State 
laws,  and,  perhaps,  degree  of  humidity — the  South  was  not 
held  to  be  militated  against  in  any  of  these  respects.117 

By  the  time  Stanwood  came  to  analyze  the  figures  of 
cotton  manufacture  for  the  1900  census,  events  had  further 

117 U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1890,  "Cotton  Manufacture," 
by  Edward  Stanwood,  pp.  171-172.  As  will  later  appear,  a  good  deal 
had  been  made  of  the  alleged  disadvantage  of  the  South  in  not 
having  a  sufficiently  humid  climate,  but  Stanwood  showed  that  the 
superiority  possessed  in  this  particular  by  the  British  Isles  hadbeen 
overcome  in  American  mills  through  use  of  artificial  humidifiers. 
The  whole  of  his  estimate  in  this  census  report  is  interesting  as  indi- 
cating how  the  southern  development  was  breaking  on  the  national 
consciousness ;  special  New  England  localities  were  given  praise,  but 
the  rise  of  the  South  as  a  cotton  manufacturing  section  held  promi- 
nent place  in  the  writer's  thought.  In  addition  to  the  percentage 
increases  in  spindles,  it  is  important  to  notice  that  in  looms,  repre- 
senting completer  commencement  of  capture  of  the  industry,  the 
percentage  advance  in  the  United  States  was  43,  in  the  Middle  States 
28,  Western  States  85,  New  England  35,  and  in  the  Southern  States 
was  204  (ibid.,  p.  171). 


68  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [_  1 74 

clarified  his  thought.118  Covered  apology  for  New  England 
in  stress  laid  upon  records  of  special  localities,  such  as  that  of 
Providence  County,  Rhode  Island,  which  had  more  spindles 
than  any  Southern  States  except  South  Carolina,  had  to 
give  way  to  the  frank  assertion  that  "  the  percentage  of 
New  England  as  a  whole  has  suffered  a  considerable  de- 
cline," from  81  in  1880  to  76  in  1890  to  67.6  in  1900.119 

"  The  growth  of  the  industry  in  the  South  is  the  one 
great  fact  in  its  history  during  the  past  ten  years."  From 
1880  to  1890  the  number  of  establishments  advanced  48.4 
per  cent,  from  the  latter  date  to  1900  the  increase  was  67.4 
per  cent,  and  the  size  of  mills  had  easily  kept  pace.  The 
interpretation  of  the  growth  of  the  Southern  industry  rep- 
resents one  of  the  earliest  conscious  attempts  at  scrutiny 
with  desire  to  analyze — Southern  cotton  manufacture  had 
become  not  only  a  fact,  but  a  fact  to  be  studied,  appre- 
ciated, understood.120  \J 

Comments  on  returns  in  the  1910  census  showed  the  per- 

118  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1900,  Cotton  Manufactures,  pp. 
28-29. 

119  Decrease  in  number  of  establishments  in  New  England  and  the 
Middle  States  was  said  to  be  more  apparent  than  real,  by  reason  of 
consolidation  of  plants  and  changes  in  census  classification.  The 
Western  States  were  shown  to  work  under  disadvantages  which  dis- 
missed them  from  further  solicitude.     Cf.  ibid.,  p.  48. 

120  "  Speaking  broadly,  the  cotton  manufacturing  industry  did  not 
exist  in  the  South  before  the  Civil  War,  and  it  existed  on  only  the 
most  restricted  scale  before  1880.  ...  It  is  probably  not  an  exagger- 
ation to  say  that  prior  to  1880  there  was  not  a  mill  south  of  the 
latitude  of  Washington  that  would  be  classed  as  an  efficient  modern 
cotton  factory,  even  according  to  the  standard  of  that  time.  Before 
the  Civil  War  the  people  of  the  South  were  almost  exclusively  en- 
gaged in  agricultural  pursuits.  After  the  war  closed  it  was  some 
years  before  the  people  had  recovered  sufficiently  from  the  disaster 
to  undertake  manufacturing."  Extended  reference  to  the  effects  of 
the  Atlanta  cotton  exposition,  the  character  of  the  cotton  mill  cam- 
paign, and  the  lessons  learned  in  matters  of  machinery  will  be 
noticed  in  another  place.  It  was  remarked  that  the  South  was 
making  experiments  of  value  to  the  whole  industry,  the  first  and, 
for  some  time,  the  only  electrically  operated  factory  being  in  that 
section.  Instead  of  the  former  speculation  as  to  the  permanence  of 
Southern  mills,  it  was  declared  that  "  The  fact  that  after  a  phe- 
nomenal growth  during  more  than  twenty  years  the  expansion  of 
old  mills  and  the  erection  of  new  ones  are  still  going  on  in  the  South 
is  ample  proof  of  the  success  of  the  enterprise,"  and  the  steady  in- 
crease in  spindles  is  given  by  years. 


175]]  THE    BACKGROUND  69 

centages  of  increase  in  the  leading  Southern  States  to  be 
decidedly  greater  than  those  in  Northern  States,  but  South 
was  merged  with  North  as  going  to  make  up  the  nearly 
exclusive  seat  of  the  industry,  the  East.  Records  of  indi- 
vidual Southern  States  are  intermixed  with  those  of  States 
of  New  England,  the  former  having  come  into  proper  com- 
parison with  the  latter  in  point  of  absolute  importance.121 

Census  reports  uncovered  fully,  after  a  period  of  time, 
facts  which  were  in  part  contemporaneously  recognized. 
The  following  chapter  will  exhibit  this  proclaiming  of  a  new 
day  in  the  South  of  1880  in  detail;  but  the  whole  study 
really  is  a  justification  of  the  assertion  that  this  date  ushered 
in  industrialism.  The  consciousness  of  a  new  economic  era, 
arising  in  the  mind  of  a  theretofore  sluggish  and  perverse 
South,  is  the  best  evidence  of  the  beginning  of  manufactur- 
ing for  the  very  good  reason,  as  will  presently  appear,  that 
expression  of  this  consciousness  went  far  to  create  the  de- 
velopment. 

Preliminary  notice  of  a  Charleston  newspaper's  trade 
review  covering  months  in  1880  and  1881  said:  "  In  the  An- 
nual Review  will  be  exhibited  the  course  and  strength  O'f 
the  manufacturing  revival  in  South  Carolina,  with  especial 
reference,  of  course,  to  the  progress  of  manufactures  in 
Charleston."122  And  the  summary  itself  declared:  "The 
industrial  feature  of  the  year  is  the  rapid  extension  of  cot- 
ton manufacturing  in  South  Carolina  in  common  with  other 
Southern  States.  .  .  .  diversified  industries  are  taking  the 
place  of  the  exclusive  cultivation  of  cotton.  .  .  ."123 

Another  paper  commented  on  the  desire  of  a  Northern 
contemporary  that  New  England  should  take  steps  to  pro- 
gress into  the  manufacture  of  finer  grades  of  cotton  goods, 
since  it  recognized  "  the  great  advance  we  are  about  to  make 
at  the  South."124  How  certainly  this  was  a  change  in  South- 
ern experience  is  shown  in  the  assurance  with  which  altera- 

121 U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  "  Cotton  Manufactures,"  pp. 
38-39. 

122  News  and  Courier,  Aug.  16,  1881. 

123  Ibid.,  Sept.  1,  1881. 

124  The  Observer,  Raleigh,  March  26,  1880. 


yO  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        ^1/6 

tion  for  the  better  was  sensed.  Thus,  "The  cities  of  the 
South  are  rapidly  learning  to  appreciate  the  great  value  of 
manufacturing  industries,  and  the  great' development  of  the 
last  year  or  two  is  only  a  beginning  of  what  may  be  ex- 
pected when  that  whole  section  throbs  with  industrial  life 
and  activity  in  the  near  future."125 

By  1884  the  new  turn  in  events  was  so  evident  that,  in 
brief  retrospect,  the  date  of  genesis  could  be  discerned.  Of 
South  Carolina  it  was  said :  "  The  State  has  now  recovered 
the  ground  that  was  lost  by  emancipation,  by  negro  suf- 
frage, by  political  misrule  and  official  corruption.  And  the 
most  significant  circumstance  is  that  the  industrial  triumph 
now  proclaimed  is  mainly  the  result  of  the  work  of  four  or 
five  years."  And  a  significant  point  was  touched  in  the  ob- 
servation that  "  agricultural  operations  could  be  carried  on 
with  reasonable  success,  in  even  the  darkest  days  of  strife 
and  misrule,  but  the  undertakings  which  were  dependent 
on  the  concentration  of  capital  for  their  development  re- 
mained torpid,  if  not  dead,  until  the  return  of  confidence 
breathed  into  them  new  life  and  vigor."126 

By  1880  one  of  the  oldest  Southern  cotton  manufac- 
0  ,  turing  towns  had  recovered.  In  1865  the  Federal  army 
burned  60,000  bales  of  cotton  and  all  the  mills  of  Colum- 
bia "  The  very  heart  of  the  city  was  burned  out.  ."  .  . 
Within  fifteen  years  the  waste  places  have  been  rebuilt  and 
industry  revived  from  its  very  ashes."127 

125  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Mfgrs.  Record,  Aug.  26, 
1882.  "...  too  little  heed  is  given  by  manufacturers  and  mechanics 
to  the  immediate  prospects  opened  up  by  what  is  termed  the  new 
departure  of  the  South;  .  .  .  there  is  no  possibility  that  the  South 
can  immediately  become  a  section  of  great  manufacturing  centres; 
but  it  is  unquestionable  that  a  combination  of  present  efforts  will  in 
time  yield  important  results"  (American  Machinist,  quoted  in  ibid., 
July  15,  1882).  Cf.  ibid.,  July  15,  and,  in  connection  with  buying  by 
Southern  merchants,  Aug.  26,  1882. 

126  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb.  4,  1884.  Giving  figures  of 
cotton  manufacture,  it  was  said :  "  In  a  little  more  than  three  years 
.  .  .  the  increase  in  production  was  a  third  more  than  in  the  ten 
years  ending  in  1880,  and  the  whole  production  in  1883  was  ten  times 
as  great  as  the  product  in  i860"  (ibid.).  As  to  the  process  of  agri- 
cultural recuperation,  cf.  Hammond,  p.  166. 

127  Observer,  Raleigh,  Sept.  10,  1880. 


I77U  THE   BACKGROUND  71 

Newspaper  notice  of  organization  of  the  Charleston 
Manufacturing  Company  in  1881  was  headed,  "The  dawn 
of  a  new  era,"  and  the  same  paper,  which  did  so  much  to 
bring  about  cotton  manufacturing,  often  showed  how 
sharply  denned  was  the  movement's  beginning.128 

The  1880  census  enabled  .the  South  to  take  stock  of  its  in- 
dustrial condition  as  a  section  and  as  part  of  the  nation,  and 
furnished  a  definite  basis  on  which  to  calculate  improve- 
ment. Speaking  of  the  increase  in  manufacture  in  Augusta, 
a  cotton  manufacturer  of  that  city  summed  up  what  had 
been  done  since  the  census  of  1880,  as  follows: 

Well,  to  particularize,  the  Sibley  Mill  has  been  completed;  the 
King  and  Goodrich  Mills  built  up  entirely  since  that  time.  The 
Summerville,  McCoy,  Globe  and  Sterling  Mills  have  all  been  in- 
creased largely,  and  the  Enterprise  Factory  more  than  doubled. 
These  increments  since  the  meagre  census  reports  were  sent  in 
mean  63,000  new  spindles,  2,200  additional  looms  and  about  2,200 
fresh  hands  .  .  .  the  increase  in  cotton  manufacturing  property 
alone  since  the  census  amounts  in  Augusta  to  $30o,ooo.129 

It  will  presently  be  shown  that  the  Atlanta  Exposition  of 
1 88 1  had  much  to  do  with  stimulating  interest  in  cotton 
manufacturing  in  the  South,  and  in  accelerating  and  broad- 

128  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Aug.  1,  1881.  Commenting  on 
an  address  of  H.  P.  Hammett,  "  Cotton  Mills  in  the  South,"  which 
was  in  itself  a  full  exposition  which  indicated  widespread  popular 
inquiry  into  the  subject,  it  was  said  that  the  speaker's  own  factory 
"was  projected  and  built  before  the  opening  of  the  Cotton  Mill 
Campaign  in  the  South,  and  Major  Hammett  ranks,  therefore,  as  one 
of  the  pioneers  .  .  ."  (ibid.). 

129  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Feb.  15,  1883.  Nine  months 
earlier  a  Georgia  paper  could  read  in  the  progress  since  the  census 
the  promise  of  a  time  when  the  South  might  "  spin  every  pound  of 
cotton  made  upon  her  fields"  (Columbus  Chronicle,  quoted  in  Balti- 
more Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Oct.  14, 
1882).  Cf.  Atlanta  correspondence  of  Augusta  Chronicle  and  Con- 
stitutionalist, quoted  in  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Feb.  8, 
1883,  and  Augusta  Trade  Review,  Oct.,  1884.  A  special  issue  of  the 
Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Sept. 
2,  1882,  denominated  "  an  exponent  of  the  new  South,"  gave  sta-r 
tistics  of  the  important  features  of  cotton  manufacturing  in  the 
South,  by  States,  at  that  date,  indicating  that  from  $15,000,000  to 
$18,000,000  had  been  invested  in  the  business  since  1880.  Cf.  Manu- 
facturers' Record,  Baltimore,  March  8,  1883;  Baltimore  Journal  of 
Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  July  29,  1882. 


72  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [178 

ening  and  lending  confidence  to  the  "  cotton  mill  campaign." 
But  it  wa9  result  as  well  as  cause.  The  rapidity  with  which 
the  exposition  was  planned  and  opened  in  a  small  town  in 
the  heart  of  a  section  unaccustomed  to  such  ventures,  and 
the  readiness  of  response  to  its  appeal  cannot  be  explained 
except  in  recognizing  that  the  Southern  thought  for  indus- 
try had  gone  far  toward  crystallizing.  A  few  years  earlier 
it  would  have  been  impossible  because  the  suggestion  of 
such  a  scheme  would  have  been  unmeaning.130 

After  Atlanta  had  had  the  faith  to  act  host  to  the  first 
exposition  predicated  upon  belief  in  the  South's  industrial 
future,  other  places,  by  entering  eagerly  into  plans  for  sim- 
ilar undertakings,  testified  to  the  awakening.  It  was  even 
proposed  to  duplicate  the  Atlanta  Exposition  in  Boston; 
this  was  perhaps  a  sophisticated  suggestion  intended  to 
lessen  the  enthusiasm  for  the  manufacturing  of  cotton  in 
the  South  that  had  been  the  rather  unexpected  outcome  of 
the  original  exhibit.131  Baltimore  in  1882  tried  to  launch 
an  exposition  that  would  allow  the  city  to  spring  into  lead- 
ership of  a  movement  of  proved  success,  and  it  was  even 
said  that  the  future  of  Baltimore  would  depend  upon  the 
way  in  which  the  proposal  was  met.132  The  next  year  Louis- 
ville and  Nashville  actively  entered  into  rivalry  for  another 

130  « T^  Atlanta  Exposition,  in  1881,  was  the  hopeful  and  con- 
scious expression  of  the  opening  of  a  new  era  for  Southern  indus- 
try; .  .  .  consequently,  wonderful  as  has  been  the  growth  of  this 
quarter  century,  it  is  but  the  realization  of  what  was  even  then  prac- 
tically assured  by  existing  attainments  and  conditions"  (Clark,  in 
South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  p.  280).  See  editorial  giving  a 
summary  of  Atlanta's  prosperity  in  The  Daily  Constitution,  Jan.  2, 
1880.  "...  it  was  all  the  work  of  merely  ten  months  from  the  time 
the  project  was  conceived  until  the  exposition  was  thrown  open  to 
the  people.  It  was  impossible  in  that  short  time,  at  that  remote  dis- 
tance, and  in  that  small  city,  to  do  the  whole  South  complete  justice. 
But  a  knowledge  of  the  South's  resources  was  demanded  .  .  ."  (J. 
W.  Ryckman,  secretary  of  the  exposition,  in  Baltimore  Journal  of 
Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  June  24,  1882).  "The  visi- 
tors to  this  [exposition]  were  convinced  that  '  an  industrial  revolu- 
tion had  actually  been  effected  in  the  South  .  .  .'"  (Hammond,  pp. 
328-329). 

131  See  Philadelphia  Industrial  Review,  quoted  in  Baltimore  Jour- 
nal of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  June  10,  1882. 

132  See  ibid.,  June  10,  Sept.  23,  Oct.  7,  21,  1882. 


I79]  THE   BACKGROUND  73 

exhibition.133  In  1883  the  board  of  agriculture  of  North 
Carolina,  aroused  to  the  possibilities  of  the  State,  paid  a 
visit  to  Boston,  and  the  next  year  occurred  the  Raleigh  ex- 
position.   The  New  Orleans  undertaking  followed  in  1885. 

The  detailed  description  of  the  condition  of  the  cotton 
manufacture  in  South  Carolina,  published  by  the  News  and 
Courier  in  1880,  was  evidence  of  the  same  consciousness  of 
industrial  stirrings  as  was  the  Atlanta  Exposition.134 

There  was  abundant  recognition  outside  of  the  South  of 
the  industrial  awakening  that  occurred  about  1880  and  was 
made  manifest  in  the  Atlanta  Exposition.  Agreement 
among  Philadelphia  cotton  manufacturers  to  shorten  pro- 
duction of  coarser  fabrics  was  held  to  be  as  wise  as  it  was 
significant,  for  "  the  time  can  not  be  far  distant  when  all 
our  coarse  cottons  will  be  supplied  from  the  cotton  belt; 
and  the  child  is  born  who  will  see  the  great  mass  of  cotton 
manufacturing  in  all  its  diversified  branches,  carried  on 
where  the  fleecy  staple  is  cultivated."135 

It  naturally  took  a  little  time  for  the  reality  of  the  South- 
ern awakening  to  break  upon  observers  who  had  hardly  ex- 
pected industrialism  from  that  section.136 

133  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Feb.  22,  1883. 

134  "  Attempts  have  been  made  at  different  times  to  show  the  ex- 
tent of  the  cotton  manufactures  in  South  Carolina,  but  until  to-day- 
no  thorough  and  complete  statement  upon  that  subject  has  been 
given  to  the  public"  (Blackman,  p.  3).  Cf.  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of 
S.  C,  p.  20. 

135  Chicago  Herald,  quoted  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and 
Manufacturers'  Record,  July  29,  1882.  A  Boston  journal  struck  a 
generous  note  that  differed  from  some  emanating  from  New  Eng- 
land in  an  article,  "  The  Drift  of  Manufacturing  " :  "  Another  Pitts- 
burgh is  growing  at  Birmingham,  Alabama;  another  Lowell  at  Au- 
gusta; another  Lawrence  at  Columbus.  .  .  .  The  East  has  no  sole 
right  to  the  term  '  manufacturing ' ;  the  drift  is  Westward  and  South- 
ward, and  is  already  a  larger  one  than  is  generally  supposed.  .  .  . 
The  time  is  not  far  distant  when  the  breeders  of  domestic  strife  will 
be  relegated  to  another  clime,  or  at  least  to  where  they  will  cease 
attempting  to  array  one  set  of  industries  in  this  great  country  against 
another  set"  (Commercial  Bulletin,  quoted  in  ibid.,  Sept.  23,  1882). 

186  "  Progress  has  been  made  with  considerable  acceleration  as  the 
wisdom  of  the  new  order  of  things  became  apparent,  until  now,  when 
it  appears  that  a  new  state  of  things  has  become  established  "  (Miller 
and  Millwright,  quoted  in  Manufacturers'  Record,  Feb.  22,  1883). 
After  speaking  of  the  local  character  of  ante-bellum  mills,  the  Dry 


74  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN   THE    SOUTH        [l80 

Space  only  remains  for  bare  mention  of  some  objective 
evidences  recommending  1880  as  the  date  to  be  chosen  as 
that  marking  the  South's  industrial  awakening.  The  return 
to  specie  payments,  bringing  confidence  to  enterprise, 
showed  itself  in  the  veritable  boom  of  the  fall  of  1879,  pre- 
cipitating events  in  the  South  as  all  over  the  nation.137  In 
1880  Southern  railway  building  took  on  new  life,  roads  in 
financial  difficulties  being  reorganized  and  narrow  gauge 
being  changed  to  broad  gauge.138  Southerners  were  accu- 
mulating a  little  surplus  cash,  as  was  indicated  by  their  abil- 
ity to  go  again  to  Saratoga  and  other  watering  places.139 

Charleston  shipbuilders  were  busy.140  Plans  for  a  cotton 
mill  in  Charlotte,  though  going  the  full  length  of  organiza- 
tion of  a  company  in  the  middle  seventies,  did  not  mature 
until  1881.141  Something  of  the  changed  impulse  back  of 
cotton  manufacturing  about  1880  may  be  indicated  in  the 
fact  that  little  was  heard  of  extensions  of  woolen  mills, 
though  there  had  been  many  small  ones  in  the  South.  The 
Clement  Attachment,  coordinating  the  work  of  ginning  and 
spinning  cotton,  apparently  did  not  cause  pilgrimages  and 
attract  discussion  until  1880.142 

Goods  Economist,  in  1896,  said :  "  Whatever  the  expansion  of  the 
cotton  industries  of  the  South  in  the  years  following  close  upon  the 
war,  .  .  .  such  progress  pales  into  insignificance  when  compared 
with  what  has  taken  place  almost  within  the  last  decade  "  (Jubilee 
number,  p.  78).  Cf.  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufac- 
turers' Record,  July  29,  1882;  Sept.  23,  1882;  News  and  Observer, 
Raleigh,  Oct.  10,  1880;  early  suggestion  of  English  interest  is  seen 
in  a  quotation  from  Iron,  Philadelphia,  in  Manufacturers'  Record, 
Feb.  8,  1883 ;  cf.  ibid.,  Dec.  21,  1882. 

137  See  Commercial  and  Financial  Chronicle,  Jan.  10,  1880;  Cope- 
land,  p.  266;  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  pp. 
264-265. 

138  See  Observer,  Raleigh,  Jan.  15,  1880,  quotation  from  Railway 
Age;  ibid.,  Jan.  8;  Baltimore  Sun,  Jan.  22,  26,  Feb.  2,  20,  1880. 

139  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  May  30,  1881. 

140  News  and  Courier,  April  13,  1881. 

141  Tompkins,  History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  i,  pp.  181-182.  Agita- 
tion for  a  special  school  tax,  bringing  several  unsuccessful  elections, 
during  which  time  the  school  was  suspended,  resulted  in  an  over- 
whelmingly favorable  vote  only  in  1880  (ibid.,  p.  168).  The  streets 
of  Charlotte  began  to  be  paved  (Tompkins,  Road  Building  and 
Broad  Tires,  p.  6). 

142  See  Blackman,  pp.  18-19,  and  many  other  references  in  this 
pamphlet. 


l8l]  THE   BACKGROUND  75 

The  economic  South  was  coming  rapidly  to  a  national 
point  of  view,  strikingly  signalized  in  the  invitation  of  busi- 
ness men  to  Edward  Atkinson  to  address  them  in  the  Senate 
chamber  of  Georgia  in  October  of  1880.143 

Cotton  goods  in  1880  were  in  brisk  demand,  their  price 
advancing  more  rapidly  than  that  of  the  raw  material;  in 
this  benefit  Southern  mills  shared.144 

Production  of  cotton  in  the  South  had  gradually  increased 
by  1880-1881  to  three  times  the  number  of  bales  of  1865- 
1866,145  and  exports  of  the  staple  from  the  section  to  for- 
eign countries  regained  i860  figures  by  1880.146  The  abun- 
dance of  cotton  in  the  section  where  factories  would  be 
likely  to  start,147  coupled  with  the  price  (on  the  average 
about  11  cents),  which  had  resulted  through  a  general  fall 
in  the  fifteen  previous  years,148  was  of  consequence. 

Shortly  after  1880  the  manufacturing  development  of 
the  South  required  special  spokesmen  and  interpreters,  and 
brought  publications  with  such  an  aim,  a9  the  Manufac- 
turers' Record  of  Baltimore,  the  Industrial  South,  of  Rich- 
mond, and  Southern  Industries,  of  Nashville,  into  exist- 
ence.149 

143  On  this  occasion,  called  by  him  (proceed.  Southern  Cotton 
Spinners'  Assn.,  1903)  "The  first  opportunity  ever  given  to  a  North- 
ern anti-slavery  man  to  speak  words  of  truth  and  soberness  to 
Southern  men,"  Mr.  Atkinson  said :  "  Malignant  conditions  [of  dis- 
union] have  passed  away.  The  active  and  vigorous  men  born  of  the 
new  South  refuse  to  be  controlled  any  longer  by  the  Bourbons  of 
that  section,  and  the  '  stalwarts '  of  the  North,  who  dare  not  trust 
the  principle  of  liberty  to  work  its  first  results,  are  being  themselves 
classed  as  Bourbons  incapable  of  guiding  or  directing  the  true  union 
that  now  exists  in  this  Nation"  (Address  at  Atlanta,  p.  8).  See 
also  ibid.,  p.  12,  and  John  W.  Ryckman  in  author's  preface  of  ibid. 

144  See  Commercial  and  Financial  Chronicle,  Jan.  3,  1880;  Balti- 
more Sun,  Jan.  8,  20,  28,  1880;  Blackman,  p.  15. 

145  Quotation  from  Bradstreet's,  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Com- 
merce and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Nov.  4,  1882. 

146  Brooks,  p.  209. 

147  Blackman,  p.  7. 

148  Quotation  from  Bradstreet's,  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Com- 
merce and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Nov.  4,  1882.  As  to  improve- 
ments in  agricultural  implements  in  the  South  by  1880,  see  Tomp- 
kins, History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  i,  p.  181 ;  a  Georgia  community 
wanted  an  agricultural  implement  factory;  steam  engines  were  sold 
for  farm  use   (Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Nov.  30,  i£ 


76  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN   THE    SOUTH       [Jl82 

Managers  of  the  New  England  Manufacturers'  and  Me- 
chanics' Institute  announced  in  March  of  1883  that  space 
in  the  exhibition  to  take  place  in  the  fall  had  been  applied 
for  by  Southern  exhibitors.150 

Suggesting  something  as  to  the  date  of  commencement  of 
cotton  manufacture  is  the  fact  that  in  1886  South  Carolina 
repealed  an  act  of  1872  exempting  from  state,  county  and 
municipal  taxes  for  ten  years  capital  invested  in  cotton, 
woolen  and  paper  mills.151 

In  the  next  chapter  it  will  be  seen  what  positive  bearing 
the  defeat  of  the  Democratic  candidate  in  the  presidential 
election  of  1880  had  upon  the  Southern  cotton  manufactur- 
ing industry.  In  this  place  it  is  only  necessary  to  note  that 
after  1880  Southern  political  animus  never  gave  itself  again 
to  such  bitterness  against  the  North,  and  thus  one  undoubted 
obstacle  to  economic  advance  was  removed.152 

149  See  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Rec- 
ord, Aug.  5,  Nov.  18,  1882;  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Nov. 
23,  1882,  Jan.  25,  1883. 

150  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  March  29,  1883. 

151  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  p.  282. 

152  See  statement  of  executive  committee  of  Columbia  and  Lexing- 
ton Water-Power  Company,  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March 
25,  1881. 


CHAPTER  II 

The  Rise  of  the  Mills 

It  has  been  seen  how  cotton  for  long  years  had  been  hurt- 
y,  ful  to  the  South;  how  it  had  joined  with  slavery  and  seces- 
sion to  bring  the  disaster  of  the  Civil  War;  how  after 
Aft  humiliating  but  sobering  Reconstruction  years  the  curtain 
was  ready  to  lift  on  a  new  act  in  which  the  characters  should 
be  chastened  in  spirit,  clarified  in  thought,  and  quick  to 
discharge  changed  roles.  The  South  by  1880  was  ready  to 
be  no  longer  negative,  but  affirmative;  not  just  the  passive 
resultant  of  its  past,  but  the  conscious  builder  of  its  future. 
From  a  consequence,  the  South  was  to  become  a  cause.1 

The  determination  with  which  the  South  entered  the  War 
was  to  hold  over  to  receive  new  application.  "  The  forti- 
tude o.f  the  march,  the  courage  of  the  charge,  the  heroism 
of  the  retreat,  the  touching  sacrifices  of  the  ill-paid  and  ill- 
equipped  soldier-life — these  were  to  be  emphasized  and  pro- 
longed, when  the  tattered  flag  no  longer  flew,  the  quick  roll 
of  the  drum  had  ceased,  and  the  comradeship  of  the  camp 
and  march  was  dissolved.  From  defeat  and  utter  poverty 
were  to  be  wrought  victory  and  plenty."2 

The  South  suffered  a  change  of  heart.  An  altered  pur- 
pose animated  its  leaders,  and  gradually  but  certainly  seized 
upon  its  rank  and  file.     President  Baldwin,  of  the  Louis- 

x" There  are  scores  of  turning-points"  in  the  history  of  cotton  in 
America  "  where,  if  wisdom  had  taken  the  skeins  from  the  hands 
of  prejudice  and  passion,  a  righteous  and  peaceful  pattern  might 
have  been  the  result"  (Scherer,  p.  296).  This  was  a  juncture  where 
judgment  was  to  prevail. 

2  Grady,  The  New  South,  p.  166.  On  the  Confederate  monument 
in  the  busy  little  city  of  Anderson,  South  Carolina,  are  the  words : 
"And  above  all  let  him  [the  truthful  historian]  tell  with  what  sub- 
lime endurance  they  met  defeat,  and  how  in  poverty  and  want, 
broken  in  health,  but  not  in  spirit,  they  have  recreated  the  greatness, 
and  made  it  again  the  sweetest  land  on  earth.  In  grateful  acknowl- 
edgment of  their  prowess  in  war,  and  of  their  achievements  in  peace, 
this  monument  is  erected." 

77 


?8  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH       ("184 

ville  and  Nashville  Railroad,  born  in  Maryland  and  for 
many  years  resident  in  New  York,  and  so  competent  to 
speak  for  both  sections,  declared  with  force : 

The  commercial  men  of  the  cotton  States  fully  appreciate  the  sit- 
uation. .  .  .  They  now  see  clearly  how  very  little  politics  have  done 
for  them,  and  seriously  turn  toward  the  real  "  reconstruction  "  which 
active  trade  will  inaugurate.  .  .  .  All  the  war  issues  are  dead  and 
buried — except  to  a  few  politicians  who  misrepresent  their  constit- 
uents and  merely  use  the  language  of  the  past  to  give  them,  person- 
ally, .  .  .  prominence.  .  .  .  True,  we  hear  a  great  deal  more  about 
the  few  men  who  stand  forth  prominently  as  the  advocates  of  these 
dead  issues  than  we  do  of  the  thousands  of  young  and  energetic 
Southern  men  who  are  building  cotton  and  woolen  mills ;  who  are 
opening  mines  and  starting  iron,  copper  and  zinc  furnaces,  or  who 
are  relaying  the  roads  between  the  Atlantic  and  the  Ohio  and  the 
Gulf.  These  men  don't  talk,  they  don't  write  books,  they  don't  go 
to  the  Legislature  or  to  Congress.  They  speak,  trumpet  toned,  in 
results.  .  .  .  Years  have  brought  time  for  thought,  and  compulsory 
thinking  has  produced  marvellous  results.  .  .  .  The  people  of  the 
South  have  suffered — it  is  not  pertinent  whether  we  regard  their 
sufferings  as  just  or  unjust — but  they  have  put  aside  mourning  and 
are  ready  for  work.3 

A  Georgian  in  welcoming  South  Carolinians  to  the  At- 
lanta Exposition  said  of  the  display  that  "  It  comes  at  a 
most  propitious  moment,  for  the  South,  in  sympathy  with 
the  quickening  energies  which  excite  the  continent,  is  even 
now  trembling  in  the  initial  throes  of  the  mighty  industrial 
revolution  that  surely  awaits  her.  A  great  change  is  evi- 
dently about  to  come  upon  us.  'In  the  fabric  of  thought 
and  of  habit'  which  we  have  woven  for  a  century  we  are 
no  longer  to  dwell,  and  a  new  era  of  progressive  enterprise 
opens  before  us."4    This  whole  study  goes  to  show  a  f unda- 

3  Quoted  from  New  York  Herald,  in  News  and  Courier,  Charles- 
ton, July  11,  1 881.  "Mills  for  the  weaving  of  the  coarser  cotton 
fabrics  are  now  in  successful  operation  in  Tennessee,  Georgia,  Ken- 
tucky and  several  of  the  Atlantic  Coast  States,  all  of  which  have 
been  built  by  native  labor,  mostly  with  local  capital  and  are  managed 
by  Southern  men.  .  .  .  The  class  formerly  known  as  '  poor  whites ' 
are  .  .  .  assimilating  with  their  more  fortunate  neighbors.  They  are 
making  good  workers  in  mine  and  field,  good  operatives  in  fac- 
tories. .  .  ." 

4  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Dec.  27,  1881.  "...  there  are 
2I3iIS7  spindles  to  Georgia's  credit.  .  .  .  These  are  the  weapons 
peace  gave  us,  and  right  trusty  ones  they  are.  .  .  .  The  story  the 
spindles  tell  is  one  of  joy  to  all,  and  show  (sic)  how  rapidly  we  are 
climbing  the  hill  of  prosperity"  (Columbus  Enquirer,  quoted  in 
Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  March  9,   1880).    Professor  Hart  has 


I85]  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  79 

mental  distinction  between  the  English  Industrial  Revolu- 
tion and  that  in  the  South,  namely,  that  the  former  was, 
certainly  in  its  immediate  causes,  unanticipated,  accidental, 
while  the  latter  was  deliberately  planned.5  This  is  plain  in 
the  quotation  just  given,  and  at  a  dinner  of  the  Burns  Char- 
itable Association  in  Charleston,  along  with  toasts  to  the 
poet  and  the  queen,  this  was  offered :  "  The  State  of  South 
Carolina — A  new  era  of  prosperity  is  about  to  dawn  upon 
her:  increasing  commerce,  manufactures,  agriculture  and 
population,  are  the  echoes  of  its  coming.'"6 

Reconstruction  governments,  under  radicals,  outsiders 
and  blacks,  had  attempted  a  political  display  through  waste- 
ful, ruinous  expenditure;  it  will  be  seen  how  different  was 
the  program  of  economic  advancement  embraced  in  the 
"  Real  Reconstruction "  of  Southerners  come  into  their 
own.7     Observing  that  "These  old  commonwealths1  were 

quoted  an  editorial  in  a  Southern  newspaper,  presumably  of  the  early 
eighties,  declaring  that  "  the  great  South  ...  is  self-contained,  and 
what  is  more,  she  is  self-possessed,  and  she  has  set  her  face  reso- 
lutely against  the  things  which  will  hurt  her  "  (p.  219). 

5  Cf.  B.  L.  Hutchins  and  A.  Harrison,  A  History  of  Factory  Legis- 
lation, pp.  19-20. 

6  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  26,  1881. 

7  Cf.  Dunning,  Reconstruction,  pp.  205-206.  How  much  earlier 
reorganization  might  have  come  in  the  South  had  not  the  carpet-bag 
regime  been  instituted,  may  be  guessed  from  the  frankness  with 
which  South  Carolina,  which  so  largely  led  the  revival  in  the  eighties, 
reentered  the  Union  in  1865.  The  sincerity  and  dignity  of  sur- 
render is  sufficiently  apparent  in  the  speech  of  Huger,  the  aged  post- 
master of  Charleston,  in  seconding  the  motion  nullifying  secession, 
in  the  constitutional  convention  following  the  war.  Of  South  Caro- 
lina he  said :  "  She  is  my  mother ;  I  have  all  my  life  loved  what  she 
loved,  and  hated  what  she  hated;  everything  she  had  I  made  my 
own,  and  every  act  of  hers  was  my  act;  as  I  have  had  but  one  hope", 
to  live  with  her,  so  now  I  have  but  one  desire,  to  die  on  her  soil  and 
be  laid  in  her  bosom.  If  I  am  wrong  in  everything  else,  I  know  I 
am  right  in  loving  South  Carolina, — know  I  am  right  in  believing 
that,  whatever  glory  the  future  may  bring  our  reunited  country,  it 
can  neither  brighten  nor  tarnish  the  glory  of  South  Carolina.  She 
has  passed  through  the  agony  and  the  bloody  sweat;  as  we  now 
return  her  to  the  Federal  Union,  let  every  man  do  his  duty  bravely 
before  the  world,  trustfully  before  God,  remembering  each  man  for 
himself  that  he  is  a  South-Carolinian.  She  has  been  devastated  by 
the  invader,  reviled  by  the  hireling,  mocked  by  the  weak-hearted, 
but  she  has  accepted  the  invitation  to  return, — accepted  it  in  good 
faith,  with  the  assurance  of  a  word  better  than  a  bond ;  and  now,  no 
matter  what  she  gives  up,  no  matter  what  there  is  to  endure  and  to 


80  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [l86 

arrested  in  their  development  by  slavery  and  by  war  and  by 
the  double  burden  of  a  sparse  population  and  of  an  ignorant 
alien  race,"  Walter  Page  recognized  that  "  The  process  that 
has  been  going  on  in  the  upland  South  in  particular  is  a 
process  of  conscious  and  natural  State-building,  construc- 
tive at  every  important  step,"  and  working  itself  out  through 
the  two  instruments  of  industry  and  popular  education.8 
The  quickness  with  which  creativeness  displaced  destruc- 
tion showed  a  purposeful  people.  "  Eighteen  years  ago," 
it  was  written  in  1882,  "the  upper  bank  of  the  Augusta 
canal  was  walled  up  with  a  chain  of  turretted  tenements  of 
brick  .  .  .  over  which  stood,  in  lofty  suggestiveness,  the 
smoke  spire.  .  .  .  These  buildings  were  frequented  by 
silent  men  who  worked  in  quiet  and  in  gloom,  and  who 
sifted  through  their  machinery  the  acids  and  minerals  which 
go  to  form  the  explosives  of  war.  From  a  hundred  battle- 
forget,  let  us  all  do  our  duty  as  becomes  her  children,  counting  it 
our  chiefest  honor  to  stand  by  her  in  evil  report  as  well  as  in  good 
report,  honor  alike  to  live  with  her  and  to  die  with  her"  (Andrews, 
The  South  since  the  War,  pp.  52-53).  Orr,  deploring  quibbles  and 
extenuations,  declared :  "  We  must  put  it  in  the  constitution  that 
slavery  is  dead,  and  that  we  will  never  attempt  to  revive  it.  .  .  .  We 
seem  to  forget  where  we  stand;  we  forget  that  we  made  the  war 
and  have  been  beaten ;  we  forget  that  our  conquerors  have  the  right 
to  dictate  terms  to  us.  .  .  .  Let  us  be  wise  men.  Let  us  strengthen" 
Jackson's  "  hands  by  graceful  and  ready  acquiescence  in  the  results 
of  the  war.  So  shall  we  strengthen  ourselves,  and  soon  bring  again 
to  our  loved  State  the  blessings  of  peace  and  civil  rule"  (ibid.,  pp. 
61-63).     Cf.  ibid.,  p.  94. 

8  Rebuilding  of  Old  Commonwealths,  p.  139.  Grady's  plan — "  the 
settlement  of  the  race  problem  and  the  development  of  the  material 
resources  of  the  South  " — was  nothing  different  (see  Oliver  Dyer, 
Sketch  of  Grady,  in  The  New  South,  pp.  76-77).  "Mr.  Grady's 
patriotism  partook  of  the  quality  of  his  love;  although  romantic 
and  general,  it  was  also  practical  and  local.  ...  It  took  hold  of  the 
.  .  .  condition  and  interests  of  the  country — of  its  diversified  indus- 
tries, its  agriculture,  its  manufactures,  its  commerce,  its  internal  de- 
velopment, its  external  relations,  its  education  and  its  religion " 
(ibid.,  p.  20).  He  said  in  1889:  "  The  industrial  growth  of  the  South 
in  the  past  ten  years  has  been  without  precedent  or  parallel.  It  has 
been  a  great  revolution,  effected  in  peace"  (New  South,  p.  191).  On 
Professor  Hart's  discussion  of  the  comparative  wealth  of  the  South 
and  other  sections,  it  may  be  commented  that  given  the  fact  of 
huge  potentialities  in  the  South  and  of  an  awakened  eagerness  to 
develop  these,  status  counts  for  little ;  given  the  loaf,  and  the  leaven 
working  in  the  loaf,  and  the  most  exacting  of  economists  must  be 
satisfied"  (see  Southern  South). 


187]  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  8 1 

fields  of  the  civil  strife,  the  blackened  granulations  of  the 
Augusta  Powder  Mills  flashed  and  thundered,  and  when 
the  war  was  over  the  mills  went  down  before  the  ravages 
of  time.  .  .  .  To-day,  the  same  spire,  with  extinguished 
craters,  overlooks  the  same  spot.  The  same  river  rolls  at 
its  feet ;  the  same  hills  confront  it  on  the  other  side.  But  in 
place  of  the  scattered  walls  of  war,  a  massive  structure, 
granite  and  compact,  is  reared.  In  the  place  of  musty  ex- 
plosives of  darker  days,  the  purest  productions  of  peace  are 
fed  into  the  present  mill,  and  from  its  looms  will  go  forth 
the  texture  to  clothe  the  people  of  the  land,  to  weave  the 
white  wings  of  commerce  and  to  float  the  bunting  of  the 
Newer  South.  The  old  picture  has  rolled  away — the  new 
one  has  received  a  solid  setting/'9 

One  cannot  view  the  passion  with  which  revival  was  un- 
dertaken without  realizing  how  pointed  were  the  lessons 
taught  the  South  in  the  war  and  its  aftermath.10  Convinced 
of  old  errors,  the  remaking  of  the  South  was  emphatically 
in  response  to  a  moral  stimulus,  mot  less  real  because  not 
always  outwardly  apparent.  "A  man  who  has  been  in  the 
whirl  of  New  York  or  in  any  of  the  brand  new  cities  of 
the  great  West  coming  into  Charleston  might  easily  enough 
come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  old  city  was  in  a  sad  state 
of  decadence — but  our  own  people  who  have  been  accus- 
tomed to  its  quiet  way  of  doing  business,  if  they  have  their 

9  Chronicle  and  Constitutionalist,  Augusta,  Feb.  23.  Though  four 
years  earlier  North  Carolina  "  would  not  be  caught  "  in  the  "  Yankee 
money  trap "  of  the  Philadelphia  Centennial  Exhibition,  in  1880  it 
was  being  asked :  "  Shall  our  Commissioner  of  Agriculture  or  our 
State  Geologist  be  .  .  .  subjected  to  the  mortifying  .  .  .  task  of 
standing  in  those  grand  halls  [of  the  proposed  world's  fair  of  1883] 
.  .  .  and  present  the  ridiculous  farce  of  representing  this  .  .  .  State 
by  showing  a  dump-cart  load  of  rocks?"  (News  and  Observer, 
Raleigh,  Nov.  12,  1880) .  Cf .  ibid.,  Dec.  2,  1880.  The  ten  "  supreme 
advantages"  claimed  by  Augusta  in  1884  were  every  one  economic, 
the  first  being  its  superiority  as  "a  manufacturing  center"  (Trade 
Review  of  Chronicle  and  Constitutionalist,  Oct.,  1884). 

10  Citing  statistics  of  property  losses  to  South  Carolina  between 
i860  and  1870  and  the  relative  gain  to  a  state  such  as  Rhode  Island, 
Murphy  wrote :  "  Beneath  these  cold  and  unresponsive  figures  there 
lie  what  tragedies  of  suffering,  what  deep-hidden  recurrent  pulses 
of  despair,  of  self-repression,  of  patience,  of  silent  and  solemn  will, 
of  self-contest,  of  ultimate  emancipation!"  (Present  South,  p.  101). 

6 


82  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN   THE    SOUTH        [l88 

eyes  open  (or  hearts  open  would  perhaps  be  the  better  ex- 
pression) could  not  fail  to  see  manifest  improvement — 
progress  even,  if  you  like  the  word  better."11 

As  the  movement  proceeded  from  introspection,  the  very 
geniu9  of  "  Real  Reconstruction "  was  self-help.  It  took 
courage  to  begin,  but  confidence  rallied  about  every  sign  of 
genuine  performance.  Thus  it  was  said  that  "  Every  true 
South  Carolinian  must  rejoice  at  the  .  .  .  energy  exhibited 
by  the  citizens  of  Columbia  in  their  management  of  the 
Cotton-Mill  Campaign.  For  years  they  have  appeared  to 
depend  on  somebody  else  to  help  them.  The  Legislature 
made  liberal  concessions.  No  effort  was  spared  to  interest 
Northern  capitalists  in  the  splendid  water  power.  .  .  .  But 
nothing  was  done.  Tired  oi  waiting  a  number  of  business 
men  in  Columbia  took  up  the  matter  themselves.  They  soon 
found  that  the  citizens  generally  would  sustain  them.  .  .  , 
the  city  is  full  of  life  again.  A  handsome  sum  of  money 
has  been  subscribed  .already  to  the  capital  stock  of  the  Cot- 
ton Mill  Company.  ...  It  will  be  a  happy  day  for  the 
whole  State  when  the  hum  of  a  myriad  spindles  is  heard  on 
the  banks  of  the  historic  Canal."12 

11  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March  24,  1881.  Timrod  wrote 
of  Charleston : 

"  How  know  they,  these  busy  gossips,  what  to  thee 
The  ocean  and  its  wanderers  may  have  brought? 
How  know  they,  in  their  busy  vacancy, 
With  what  far  aim  thy  spirit  may  be  fraught? 
Or  that  thou  dost  not  bend  thee  silently 
Before  some  great  unutterable  thought?" 

(Henry  Timrod,  Poems,  Memorial  Ed.,  1899,  p.  172).  Professor 
Sioussat  has  stressed  the  significance  of  the  economic  readjustment 
between  1865  and  1880,  "a  readjustment  more  fundamentally  im- 
portant than  the  political  events  which  in  large  degree  overshadowed 
the  less  dramatic  factors"  (History  Teacher's  Magazine,  Sept.,  1916, 
p.  224).  Cf.  Ingle,  p.  5.  Declaring  right  after  the  war  that  negro 
slavery  had  been  hardly  more  debasing  than  white  slavery,  Andrews 
foresaw  that  the  remaking  of  the  South  must  reach  down  to  basic 
tasks :  "  That  is  the  best  plan  which  proposes  to  do  most  for  the 
common  people"  (pp.  387-388).  Cf.  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of 
Nation,  vol.  vi,  p.  254. 

12  "  The  News  and  Courier  busies  itself  with  every  enterprise,  big 
and  little,  that  will  turn  a  dollar's  worth  of  raw  material  into  more 
than  a  dollar's  worth  of  manufactures.  ...  we  confess  to  a  weak- 


189J  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  83 

This  self-reliance  never  meant  exclusion  of  assistance 
from  the  North  or  elsewhere ;  it  meant  a  broadening,  not  a 
contracting  of  view.  "  Some  of  that  credit  which  was  ac- 
corded to  the  man  who  caused  an  additional  blade  of  grass 
to  grow  should  be  given  to  everyone,"  whether  home  or  out- 
side enterpriser,  "  who  affords  facilities  to  manufacture  an 
additional!  boll  of  cotton.  .  .  ."13  The  South,  ready  to 
plunge  into  its  task,  took  stock  of  itself.  "  All  questions  of 
domestic  economy,  and  especially  those  involving  the  capi- 
tal of  our  people,  whether  in  the  shape  of  labor  or  dollars, 
will  necessarily  be  canvassed  and  scrutinized  very  closely 
in  their  bearings  on  our  material  progress.  .  .  ,"14 

Even  those  communities  most  earnest  in  social  regenera- 
tion, and  most  anxious  to  forget  the  past  in  looking  to  a 
saner  future,  very  occasionally  slipped  back  into  old  ruts, 
and  found  in  material  advancement  the  means  of  satisfying 
spitefulness.  Thus  an  attempt  to  settle  foreigners  upon  a 
large  tract  in  eastern  Tennessee  was  commended  partly  be- 
cause it  would  increase  congressional  representation  of  the 

ness  for  Columbia,  which  suffered  so  sorely  at  the  end  of  the  war. 
.  .  .  But  cotton  mills  will  soon  make  amends  for  the  vicissitudes  and 
hopelessness  of  the  past  .  .  ."  (News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March 
19,1881).  Another  paper  discouraged  reliance  upon  the  government 
for  prosperity,  and  pointed  to  relief  that  had  come  to  the  West  only 
through  self-help:  "That  government  is  the  best  which  is  not  re- 
quired ...  to  pass  new  laws,  leaving  to  the  people  the  utmost  free- 
dom, with  full  liberty  to  devote  their  energies  to  the  improvement 
of  their  own  condition.  .  .  .  We  know  of  no  people  more  favorably 
situated  than  North  Carolinians  are  in  this  respect"  (Observer, 
Raleigh,  Jan.  9,  1880).  As  Ireland  in  its  cooperative  agricultural 
efforts  later,  the  South  was  experiencing  a  "  combination  of  eco- 
nomic and  human  reform"  (see  Plunkett,  pp.  205-206).  "There 
came  a  different  viewpoint,"  said  one  informant.  "  The  old  South 
was  done  away  with.  The  problem  was  to  utilize  the  thing  nearest 
at  hand  to  support  a  large  portion  of  our  people."  And  so  the 
North  Carolina  Board  of  Agriculture  made  an  investigating  trip  to 
New  England,  and  an  industrial  exhibit  was  held  "  (Henry  E.  Fries, 
int.,  Winston-Salem,  N.  C,  Aug.  31,  1916). 

13  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  June  28,  1881. 

14  News  and  Observer,  Raleigh,  Dec.  1,  1880.  "  South  Carolina  in 
1884,"  a  60-page  pamphlet  published  by  the  News  and  Courier  after 
a  comprehensive  survey  of  economic  conditions  prevailing  in  each 
county,  shows  the  strength  of  this  spirit.  In  descriptive  detail  it  is 
a  valuable  photograph  of  agriculture  and  industry  in  the  State  at 
that  date. 


84  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH         [19O 

South  and  enable  it  the  better  to  protect  itself  against  "  adu 
verse  legislation."15 

Once  awake,  how  immediately  the  South  went  to  work  is 
evidenced  in  notices  proclaiming  the  new  order  of  things. 
"  The  time  was  when  the  South  was  exclusively  agricultural 
in  its  pursuits,  but  the  past  few  years  have  seen  factories 
springing  up  all  over  this  section.  .  .  .  The  South  is  destined 
at  no  distant  day  to  not  only  raise  cotton  .  .  .  but  to  manu- 
facture it  .  .  .  thus  keeping  at  home  all  the  profits."16  It 
was  recognized  that  Southern  economic  life  was  becoming 
more  diversified,  in  agriculture  and  in  industry,  and  so  com- 
munities were  growing  independent.17  The  franker  and 
more  generous  Northern  papers  joined  writers  at  the  South 
in  encouraging  the  new  development.  It  was  generally  held 
at  the  time  that  internal  impulse  wa9  chiefly  responsible  for 
the  change  in  program.  It  could  not  be  said  of  the  South 
as  of  the  establishment  of  the  factory  regime  in  England 

15  Observer,  Raleigh,  Aug.  25,  1880.  Virginia,  never  so  ardently 
back  of  economic  recuperation  as  States  to  the  south,  was  perhaps 
hindered  by  internal  dissension  over  repudiation  of  part  of  her  debt; 
the  papers  at  this  juncture  were  filled  with  political  wrangles  (cf. 
Daily  Dispatch,  Richmond,  Feb.  9,  March  24,  1880).  The  proposal 
to  exempt  manufacturing  plants  from  taxation,  already  bringing 
results  further  South,  could  raise  protest  from  the  farming  interest 
(cf.  ibid.,  Jan.  14,  27,  1881).  Public  solicitude  over  industrial  devel- 
opment was  far  less  marked  than  in  the  Carolinas  and  Georgia, 
partly  because  of  border  position  of  Virginia,  partly,  perhaps,  be- 
cause there  was  not  the  one  chief  manufacture,  cotton,  on  which  to 
center  attention.  There  was  less  reliance  on  home  effort,  more  look- 
ing to  outside  assistance  (cf.  ibid.,  March  29,  1880).  Mississippi 
had  time  for  childish  vituperation  over  dead  issues.  A  Wisconsin 
editor  had  asked  a  Mississippi  contemporary,  "  Did  you  ever  read  of 
Appomattox?"  He  received  the  reply:  "  O,  Yes!  We've  read  of 
Appomattox,  where  a  few  hungry  and  ragged  thousands  surrendered 
to  a  man  with  a  million  of  men  under  his  command.  ..  .  .  the  whole 

.wide  world  remembers  that  it  required  five  of  your  federals  to  whip 
one  of  our  confederates.  .  .  .  Will  you  fight  for  Grant  if  he  should 
slap  a  golden  crown  on  his  cranium?  .  .  .  The  last  man  of  you  that 
shoulders  a  shot-gun  in  behalf  of  your  gory  god  will  be  hunted  down 
like  dogs  .  .  ."  (quoted  in  Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  Feb.  I,  1880). 
Cf.  a  headline  in  Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  April  11,  1880,  and 
colloquies  in  ibid.,  March  14,  1880;  News  and  Observer,  Raleigh, 
Dec.  18,  1880;  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  June,  1881. 

16  Americus,  Ga.,  Recorder,  quoted  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Com- 
merce and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Oct.  14,  1882. 

17  Cf.  Miller  and  Millwright,  quoted  in  Manufacturers'  Record, 
Baltimore,  Feb.  22,  1883. 


I91]  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  85 

that  "As  a  great  fact  the  system  originated  in  no  precon- 
ceived plan ;  on  the  contrary,  it  was  formed  and  shaped  by 
the  inevitable  force  of  circumstance.  .  .  .  The  first  force 
which  tended  to  create  this  system  was  that  of  invention. 
.  .  ,"18  After  deploring  "  the  errors  of  previous  generations 
in  their  persistent  blindness  to  home  possibilities,  while 
spending  their  money  North  and  abroad,"  it  was  declared: 
"  The  war  cost  us  heavily — oh !  so  heavily — but  we  bent  our 
stout  hearts  patiently  to  our  tasks,  and  have  profited,  and 
will  profit,  by  its  lessons."19  Contemporary  spokesmen  were 
naturally  in  some  instances  cautious  to  explain  that  "  The 
New  South  "  did  not  imply  repudiation  of  the  best  spirit  of 
the  old  South.20  An  understanding  interpreter  has  ob- 
served that  Southerners,  when  slavery  and  the  war  were 
past,  "began  .  .  .  to  beat  their  swords  into  plow  shares 
and  their  spears  into  pruning  hooks  and  to  enter  upon  the 
childhood  of  material  growth  .  .  .  ,  to  give  up  the  old  time 
Southern  ways  and  ideas  of  life,  and  to  blend  the  character- 
istics of  that  day  with  the  new  spirit  of  business  enterprise 
and  thrift,  changing  from  '  hornets  in  war  to  bees  in  in- 
dustry.' .  .  ."21 

Before  1880  the  South  had  worn  a  veil  before  her  eyes, 
had  been  running  a  temperature  that  distorted  economic 
perspective,  corrupted  public  judgment.  When  the  veil  was 
torn  off  and  the  fever  subsided,  normal  thinking  brought 
frank  avowal  of  the  past  distemper.  The  section  had  woven 
"  rosy  day-dreams  of  a  far-off  greatness,"  and1  been  tortured 

18  Carroll  D.  Wright,  "  The  Factory  System  of  the  U.  S.,"  in 
U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1880,  p.  1. 

19  Augusta  correspondence  of  Savannah  Morning  News,  July  4, 
1882.  Cf.  News  and  Observer,  Raleigh,  Nov.  16,  1880,  praising  the 
industrial  progress  of  Augusta. 

20  Cf.  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Dec.  27, 1881.  Mr.  Edmonds' 
solicitude  on  this  point  has  been  noticed ;  cf .  Edmonds,  p.  1. 

21  W.  C.  Heath,  in  Southern  Cotton  Spinners'  Assn.,  proceed.,  1903, 
p.  49.  Post-bellum  activity  in  mill  building  recalled  the  fact  that 
years  before  planters  had  conceived  the  advantage  in  manufacturing, 
but  were  deterred  by  slavery;  originality,  to  be  effective,  needed  to 
work  under  a  new  dispensation.  Cf.  Gannon,  Landowners  of  South 
and  Industrial  Classes  of  North,  p.  6  ff . ;  Andrews,  pp.  224-226. 


86  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN   THE    SOUTH         [192 

by  a  "  delusive  mirage,"22  but  now  "  The  South  must  .  .  . 
look  out  for  herself,  and  bring  her  great  advantages  to  bear 
in  her  favor,  asking  only  a  free  field  and  a  fair  fight  against 
all  competitors.  ...  It  means  work  and  not  words."23 

To  appreciate  the  strength  of  the  demand  for  social  re- 
generation, it  must  be  recognized  that  while  cotton  'manu- 
facturing formed  its  central  purpose,  the  movement  was 
comprehensive,  embracing,  in  thought  if  not  in  deed,  many 
departments  of  life.  Progress  along  all  lines  was  not  simul- 
taneous or  equal.  It  is  not  hard  to  see  why  public  education, 
for  example,  did  not  so  soon  translate  desire  into  realiza- 
tion as  did  industry.  Bread  and  meat  must  first  be  looked 
to,  and  the  South  then  could  turn  to  plans  which,  if  more 
truly  fundamental,  were  still  less  instantly  pressing.24  If 
the  will  was  surely  present,  and  it  was  felt  that  "  The  South- 
ern States  ought,  in  justice  to  posterity,  to  take  this  matter 
of  public  schools  in  hand,"25  it  needed  twenty  years  until 
performance  could  follow.  When  the  South,  after  1900, 
did  embark  on  an  educational  campaign,  the  fervor  pre- 
viously given  to  industry  received  new  expression.26  It 
was  "  Real  Reconstruction  "reaching  another  task. 

In  the  English  Industrial  Revolution  other  trades  bor- 
rowed stimulus  from  textiles;27  in  the  South,  where  the 
causal  force  was  subjective  rather  than  objective,  this  would 
more  certainly  be  the  case.     Improvement  in  farming  was 

22  Industrial  South,  quoted  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce 
and  Manufacturers'  Record,  June  17,  1882. 

23  Gannon,  Landowners  of  South  and  Industrial  Classes  of  North, 
pp.  6-7. 

2i  "  I  do  not  .  .  .  suggest  that  any  other  agency  of  .  .  .  economic 
progress  can  be  more  than  a  very  partial  substitute  for  education; 
but  only  that,  in  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  Ireland,  we  must  have 
recourse  to  supplementary  influences  which  will  produce  a  more  im- 
mediate effect  upon  the  general  life  of  the  present  generation  while 
its  young  people  are  being  educationally  developed"  (Plunkett,  pp. 
51-52). 

25  News  and  Observer,  Raleigh,  Nov.  20,  1880. 

26  Sioussat,  p.  270.  "  Enthusiasm  like  that  of  a  great  religious 
movement  developed  and  the  result  was  that  in  the  decade  1900- 
1909  the  total  school  revenues  in  these  States  had  been  more  than 
doubled." 

27  Cf.  Scherer,  pp.  51-52. 


193]  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLS  %7 

especially  significant.  In  the  zeal  for  manufacturing,  the 
temptation  would  be  to  neglect  agriculture,  the  old  bete 
noire,  and  so  not  keep  ever  in  mind  the  higher  wisdom  of  an 
economic  balance.28  But  exodus  of  many  negroes  from  a 
South  Carolina  county  was  thought  by  some  a  blessing  in 
disguise,  in  that  it  would  stimulate  diversification  and  rota- 
tion of  crops,  rest  land  which  needed  rest;  crops  requiring 
less  attention  than  cotton,  grain  for  example,  would  be 
raised.29  North  Carolina  farmers  were  encouraged  to  at- 
tend an  agricultural  meeting  in  far-away  Connecticut.30 

"  We  at  the  South,"  it  was  said,  "...  if  we  intend  to 
turn  over  a  new  leaf  and  seek  a  new  development  for  our 
section,"  must  inaugurate  shipping  relations  with  Brazil,31 
form  something  like  a  Southern  chamber  of  commerce,32 
form  a  mercantile  connection  with  Cincinnati,33  send  cotton 
abroad  through  Southern  ports,34  promote  harmony  within 
the  section.35  "  The  railroad  fever  is  epidemic  in  Georgia," 
it  was  as'serted.  "  Every  village  wants  a  railroad  to  its 
neighbor."36  The  next  year  it  could  be  said  "  There  are 
now  over  20,000  men  and  100,000  horses  and  mules  em- 
ployed in  railroad  building  in  Texas,"37  and  a  North  Caro- 
lina editor  even  foresaw  danger  of  railroad  domination  in 
state  politics.38 

28  A  friendly  adviser  pointed  out  the  danger  of  excessive  manu- 
facturing in  England,  and  urged  that  the  South  seek  development 
of  agriculture  beside  industry  (United  States  Economist,  quoted  in 
Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Sept. 
30,  1882. 

29  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  2,  1882. 

30  News  and  Observer,  Raleigh,  Nov.  30,  1880.  "  Our  system  of 
agriculture  is  too  much  on  the  order  of  present  enjoyment  and  does 
not  have  sufficient  regard  for  future  use.  .  .  .  We  would  gladly  see 
all  of  the  profits  of  this  year's  crop  spent  on  the  land  itself.  .  .  ." 
(ibid.,  Sept.  19,  1880). 

31  News  and  Observer,  Raleigh,  Nov.  17,  28,  1880. 

32  Ibid.,  Dec.  5,  1880. 

33  Observer,  Raleigh,  April  1,  1880. 

84  News  and  Observer,  Raleigh,  Nov.  13,  1880. 

35  Observer,  Raleigh,  July  11,  1880. 

36  Observer,  Raleigh,  Feb.  6,  1880.  Cf.  ibid.,  Jan.  15,  Feb.  20, 
1880. 

37  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  May  30,  1881 ;  cf.  ibid.,  April 
29,  1881. 

38  Observer,  May  1,  1880. 


88  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN   THE    SOUTH        [l94 

Interest  was  taken  in  extension  of  telegraph  and  tele- 
phone lines.39  Temperance  societies  showed  augmented 
support.40  Duelling  was  coming  to  be  called  murder  in 
South  Carolina.41  The  section  exulted  in  the  erection  of 
cotton  seed  mills  and  exploitation  of  iron  ores  and  phos- 
phates, cultivation  of  oranges  and  rice,  and  extension  of 
cattle  and  sheep  raising.42  Cries  for  colonization  of  the 
negro,  earlier  condemned,43  had  hushed. 

More  than  a  contributing  cause  in  the  growing  desire  for 
economic  renovation  of  the  South,  and  amounting  certainly 
to  a  decisive  accelerant,  was  the  defeat  of  Hancock  by  Gar- 
field in  the  presidential  election  of  1880.  The  South,  emerg- 
ing from  the  humiliation  of  Reconstruction,  had  centered 
hopes  on  a  victory  for  Tilden  over  Hayes  four  years  earlier, 
and  when  the  Democratic  candidate  was  counted  out,  by  a 
likely  fraud  as  the  section  was  willing  enough  to  believe  it, 
despair  gave  way  to  resentment  and  the  Solid  South,  nurs- 
ing its  pride  and  revengefulness  during  Hayes'  administra- 
tion, dedicated  itself  to  Hancock's  triumph.  In  the  four 
years  between  elections,  the  South,  bearing  many  real  griev- 
ances, sought  to  lighten  them  by  lashing  itself  to  a  false 
ambition.  Hancock's  success  would  give  answer  to  the 
North  and  cure  Southern  sorrows.  It  was  looked  forward 
to  as  "  the  first  full,  and  fair,  and  free  presidential  election 
in  which  the  South  has  participated  since  the  war.  There 
will  be  no  intimidation  of  voters  by  means  of  the  army.  .  .  . 
There  will  be  no  southern  returning  boards  upon  whose 
venality  the  republican  leaders  can  rely  in  case  of  a  close 
contest."44 

The  shock  of  Hancock's  defeat  threw  the  South,  so  to 
speak,  back  upon  its  haunches.  The  days  immediately  fol- 
lowing are  surcharged  with  interest  for  the  student  of 
Southern  economic  history. 

39  See  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  1,  May  4,  1881. 

40  Ibid.,  April  22,  May  5,  28,  June  13,  1881. 
«■  Ibid.,  March  io,  1881. 

42  Observer,  Raleigh,  Sept.  4,  1880.  Cf.  Daily  Constitution,  At- 
lanta, March  30,  1880. 

43  Andrews,  p.  158. 

44  Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  Feb.  15,  1880. 


195]  THE   RISE    OF   THE    MILLS  89 

The  News  and  Observer,  of  Raleigh,  which  had  been  vio- 
lently sectional  and  which  for  a  few  days  after  the  election 
consoled  its  readers  with  hope  of  victory  four  years  hence, 
within  a  week  changed  front  and  gave  expression  to  a  new 
spirit  that,  suddenly  and  with  compelling  force,  was  sweep- 
ing the  people.45  It  was  declared  that  "  we  have  been  de- 
feated in  the  national  contest.  In  the  administration  of  the 
national  government  for  the  next  four  years  we  need  not 
concern  ourselves,  for  as  far  as  possible  our  councils  will 
be  ignored.  What,  then,  is  our  duty  ?  It  is  to  go  to  work 
earnestly  to  build  up  North  Carolina.  Nothing  is  to  be 
gained  by  regrets  and  repinings.  No  people  or  State  is 
better  able  to  meet  emergencies.  .  .  .  And  what  nobler 
employment  could  enlist  the  energies  of  a  people  than  the 
developing  of  the  great  resources  of  our  .  .  .  State.  .  .  . 
But  with  all  its  .  .  .  splendid  capabilities  it  is  idle  to  talk 
of  home  independence  so  long  as  we  go  to  the  North  for 
everything  from  a  toothpick  to  a  President.  We  may  plead 
in  vain  for  a  higher  type  of  manhood  and  womanhood 
among  the  masses,  so  long  as  we  allow  the  children'  to  grow 
up  in  ignorance.  We  may  look  in  vain  for  the  dawn  of  an 
era  of  enterprise,  progress  and  devolpment,  so  long  as  thou- 
sands and  millions  of  money  are  deposited  in  our  banks  on 
four  per  cent  interest,  when  its  judicious  investment  in 
manufacture  would  more  than  quadruple  that  rate,  and 
give  profitable  employment  to  thousands  of  our  now  idle 
women  and  children. 

"  Out  of  our  political  defeat  we  must  work  ...  a  glor- 
ious material  and  industrial  triumph.  We  must  have  less 
politics  and  more  work,  fewer  stump  speakers  and  more 
stump  pullers,  less  tinsel  and  show  and  boast,  and  more 
hard,  earnest  work.  .  .  .  Work  for  the  material  and  edu- 
cational advancement  of  North  Carolina,  and  in  this  and 

45  In  quotations  from  influential  newspapers  it  will  be  observed 
that  the  changed  view,  breaking  on  the  South  so  quickly,  at  first 
carried  something  of  sectional  prejudice;  industrial  upbuilding 
would  be  partly  spitefulness  against  the  North.  But  this  was  the 
whimpering  of  a  child  while  drying  its  tears. 


90  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [196 

not  in  politics,  will  be  found  her  refuge  and  her  strength.''*8 
Following   the  installation    of    Garfield,    another  editor 
finely  said: 

But  if  we  lost  the  victory,  in  one  sense,  we  have  won  it  in  another. 
We  have  been  taught  what  the  South  can  do  for  itself  if  it  wills  to 
do  it.  If  we  have  lost  the  victory  on  the  field  of  fight  we  can  win  it 
back  in  the  workshop,  in  the  factory,  in  an  improved  agriculture  and 
horticulture,  in  our  mines  and  in  our  schoolhouses.  There  is  where 
our  fight  lies  now,  and  the  only  enemies  before  us  are  the  prejudices 
of  the  past,  the  instincts  of  isolation,  the  brutal  indifference  and 
harmful  social  infidelity  which  stands  up  in  our  day  with  the  old 
slave  arguments  at  its  heart  and  on  its  lips,  "I  object"  and  "You 
can't  do  it."4' 

No  people  less  homogeneous,  less  one  family,  knit  to- 
gether and  resolute  through  sufferings,  could  have  taken 
instant  fire,  as  did  the  South,  at  such  appeals.  Facilities  for 
satisfying  the  need  were  not  narrowly  investigated.  The 
South  was  shut  up  to  such  and  such  means — they  must  fit 
into  imperative  requirement.48 

46  Nov.  9,  1880.  "  We  must  make  money — it  is  a  power  in  this 
practical  business  age.  Teach  the  boys  and  girls  to  work  and  teach 
them  to  be  proud  of  it.  .  .  .  Demand  all  legislative  encouragement 
for  manufacturing  that  may  be  consistent  with  free  political 
economy." 

47  Columbia  Register,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston, 
March  18,  1881.  Columbia  at  this  time  was  entering  upon  the  fervor 
to  develop  its  canal  and  build  a  cotton  mill.  The  editor  of  the  Reg- 
ister had  been  a  slaveholder.  This  pronouncement  is  purged  of  an 
earlier  and  unworthy  jealousy  which  had  sometimes  appeared  in  such 
expressions  as  the  following  from  another  paper :  "  The  South 
should  depend  upon  its  own  virtue,  its  own  brain,  its  own  energy, 
attend, to  its  own  business,  make  money,  build  up  its  waste  places, 
and  thus  force  from  the  North  that  recognition  of  our  worth  and 
dignity  of  character  to  which  that  people  will  always  be  blind  unless 
they  can  see  it  through  the  medium  of  material,  industrial  and  intel- 
lectual strength.  We  may  proclaim  political  theories,  but  it  is  the 
more  potent  .  .  .  argument  of  the  mighty  dollar  that  secures  an 
audience  there,  and  the  sooner  we  realize  it  the  better  for  us  "  (News 
and  Observer,  Raleigh,  Nov.  27,  1880). 

48  Also,  as  has  been  seen,  a  philosophy  which  had  right  quietly, 
sometimes  half-consciously,  been  taking  shape  in  the  Southern  mind, 
was  just  now  becoming  fully  articulate.  For  example,  some  months 
before  the  election,  it  had  been  said :  "  While  the  politicians  are 
making  a  great  deal  of  noise  over  the  states  rights  question,  the 
people  of  the  South  are  quietly  making  substantial  industrial  prog- 
ress. .  .  .  The  cotton  mills  in  operation  have  proved  very  profitable. 
New  mills  are  projected.  .  .  .  The  signs  of  the  great  industrial 
change  now  going  on  in  the  South  are  plainly  visible  everywhere. 


197]  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  9 1 

But  the  South  did  more  than  receive  a  new  economic  aim. 
Garfield  elected,  it  began  to  show  further  the  faith  that  had 
been  welcomed,  and  moved  to  renounce  political  separatism : 
"  The  Southern  people  must  be  National  themselves,  in  their 
aspirations  and  conduct,  if  they  would  have  the  Govern^- 
ment  truly  national  in  spirit,"  and  Garfield  president  not  of 
a  section  or  party.  "  To  have  a  government  of  '  the  whole 
country,'  to  be  entitled  to  it,  we  must  think  of  the  whole 
country  as  our  own,  and  demand  no  more  than  we  are  ready 
to  give.    It  must  come  to  this."49 

Garfield'9  assassination  showed  how  ready  the  South  was 
to  join  hands  with  the  North.  "  It  could  not  have  been  fore- 
seen .  .  .  that  the  outburst  of  sympathy  and  condemnation 
would  have  been  universal  in  its  manifestation,  affectionate 
in  tone  and  National  in  spirit.     South  Carolina  does  more 

.  .  .  The  people  of  the  South  are  beginning  to  learn  that  the  true 
road  to  power  is  not  through  the  white  house,  supported  by  a  swarm 
of  federal  officials.  They  are  learning  that  solid  wealth  is  power, 
and  that  wealth  is  attainable  only  by  working  up  their  cotton  and 
wool  into  fabrics  and  their  ores  into  metals"  (Memphis  Avalanche, 
quoted  in  Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  March  30,  1880) .  "  Distinc- 
tion must  be  made  between  the  political  talk  in  the  papers  and  what 
the  people  really  wanted.  There  was  a  strong  but  silent  undercur- 
rent for  economic  welfare,  while  the  politician  was  still  singing  the 
old  song"  (E.  C.  Brooks,  int.,  Durham,  N.  C,  Sept.  18,  1916).  Ap- 
proval of  the  thought  that  Hancock's  defeat  threw  the  South  into  a 
reversed  frame  of  mind  was  received  in  interviews  with  some  men 
who  lived  through  the  events,  but  from  none  of  the  newer  generation. 
49  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March  9,  1881.  "In  the  near 
future  the  successful  leaders,  South  and  North,  will  be  those  whose 
first  thought  is  for  the  Republic;  men  who  are  National  in  feeling 
and  purpose;  men  who  understand  that  the  political  and  social 
strength  and  safety  of  each  State  depend  not  on  isolation  and  sepa- 
ration, but  on  combination  and  union."  Cf.  ibid.,  May  7,  1881.  A 
New  Orleans  editor  said:  "The  bitterness,  prejudice  and  hostility 
to  the  changes  wrought  by  the  war  which  were  so  marked  a  few 
years  ago  are  disappearing.  There  is  now  a  very  noticeable  .  .  . 
disposition  to  accept  the  situation  as  it  is,  and  on  this  basis  to  build 
a  new  South  which  shall  surpass  in  wealth,  glory  and  greatness  the 
old  South.  .  .  .  before  another  National  campaign  opens  this  ele- 
ment will  control  the  political  and  material  affairs  of  the  South  " 
(Times-Democrat,  quoted  in  ibid.,  Feb.  4,  1881).  Cf.  A.  K.  Mc- 
Clure,  The  South :  Industrial,  Financial,  Political,  p.  53 ;  Dunning, 
p.  198.  Not  all  leaders  were  so  sensible;  Senator  Vance,  of  North 
Carolina,  looking  forward  to  Garfield's  term,  was  belying  his  pro- 
fessions by  asserting  "  The  thing  that  has  been  is  the  thing  that  shall 
be"  (News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb.  23,  1881). 


92  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN   THE    SOUTH        [198 

than  reprobate  assassination.  The  .  .  .  whole  people,  re- 
sent the  deed  because  the  victim  is  the  President  of  the 
United  States.  .  .  .  The  forces  of  reunion  had  gone  on 
with  a  rapidity  which  few  appreciated.  All  the  elements  of 
cordial  friendship  and  of  national  good-will  were  there.  It 
needed  only  the  threat  of  a  common  misfortune  to  give 
shape  and  voice  to  the  recreate  [sic]  but  sturdy  love  of  the 
Republic."50 

It  is  clear  that  the  pressing  task  of  the  South,  from  the 
day  of  Appomattox,  was  truly  an  economic  and  social  and 
not  a  political  one.51  By  1880  this  was  publicly  apparent, 
and  no  later  expression  of  this  view52  has  been  plainer  than 
contemporary  exhortations  that  the  people  shut  ears  to 
politicians  and  open  sympathies  to  constructive  action. 

"  So  long  as  we  have  sectional  enmity  in  politics  in  the 

60  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  July  13,  1881.  "...  the  Presi- 
dent's desperate  illness  .  .  .  has  done  more  than  years  of  ordinary 
events  in  bringing  the  North  and  South  together.  .  .  .  Vainly  will 
the  politicians  flourish  the  '  bloody  flag.'  The  people  will  not  rally 
on  the  ensanguined  colors  again"  (ibid.,  July  18,  1881).  Cf.  ibid., 
July  14,  giving  interview  with  Jefferson  Davis,  and  Sept.  20,  1881 ; 
William  A.  Harden,  A  History  of  Savannah  and  South  Georgia,  p. 
485.  The  cordiality  with  which  the  First  Connecticut  Regiment  was 
received  in  Charleston  the  month  following  Garfield's  death  was 
believed  an  outgrowth  of  the  city's  sorrow  at  the  national  tragedy. 
The  first  column  of  the  News  and  Courier  bore  the  flags  of  Con- 
necticut and  South  Carolina  crossed,  with  the  legends,  "  Yankee 
Doodle  Come  to  Town,"  and  "  A  Welcome  Invasion."  An  editorial 
spoke  of  the  war  as  a  "grand  lesson  to  the  South,"  and  declared: 
"  We  have  learned  that  we  cannot  stand  alone,  that  our  fight  must 
be  made  within  the  Union  .  .  ."  (Oct.  24,  1881). 

51  Cf.  Sioussat,  p.  223. 

52  "  The  greatest  statesman  of  the  South  in  recent  times  was  Sea- 
man A.  Knapp,  who  believed  that  the  demonstration  farm  was  of 
more  value  to  society  than  the  noisiest  political  convention  .  .  . ;  that 
a  boy's  corn  club  would  do  more  to  enrich  materially  the  life  of  the 
people  than  the  fattest  office  won  on  the  hustings.  .  .  .  The  unselfish 
servants  of  the  people,  working  in  humble  ways  to  improve  the  farm, 
the  road,  the  factory,  the  home,  the  school,  and  the  church  are  the 
true  statesmen  of  the  South"  (Samuel  C.  Mitchell,  "The  Challenge 
of  the  South  for  a  Better  Nation,"  in  The  South  Mobilizing  for 
Social  Service,  p.  46).  Cf.  ibid.,  p.  45.  "  Back  of  the  patriotismof 
arms,  back  of  the  patriotism  of  our  political  and  civic  life,  there  lies, 
like  a  new  and  commanding  social  motive,  the  patriotism  of  efficiency. 
...  It  is  not  merely  the  patriotism  of  industrial  power.  It  is  the 
patriotism  of  social  fitness  and  of  economic  value.  It  is  the  passion 
of  usefulness"  (Murphy,  Present  South,  p.  148).    Cf.  ibid.,  p.  316. 


199]  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  93 

South  its  material  prosperity  will  be  checked  and  an  abso- 
lute injury  will  be  sustained  ...  by  exciting  distrust  of 
capital  and  prejudices  of  immigration.  The  Southern  peo- 
ple, outside  of  the  professional  politicians,  care  very  little 
about  Federal  politics.  They  are  endeavoring  to  develop 
the  resources  of  the  South  and  regain  the  broken-down  for- 
tunes left  by  the  desolation  of  civil  war."53  Asserting  that 
the  South  should  welcome  outside  enterprisers,  bid  for  gov- 
ernment appropriations  and  hold  to  the  party  that  could 
insure  peace  in  which  to  follow  economic  pursuits,  a  South 
Carolinian  wrote  that  "  The  object  of  our  politics  should  be 
the  development  of  our  resources.  ...  In  this  State  we 
need  capital  and  less  party  and  politics."54    It  was  not  until 

53  Sumpter,  S.  C,  Southron,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charles- 
ton, May  14,  1881.  "  So  taking  the  past  and  the  present  as  indices 
for  the  future,  it  is  plain  to  see  that  a  dissolution  of  the  Solid  South 
will  cut  at  the  very  roots  of  all  these  wrangles  between  the  North 
and  the  South  in  which  sectionalism  is  involved."  Cf.  Observer, 
Raleigh,  Jan.  29,  1880,  in  comment  on  an  editorial  of  Financial 
Chronicle. 

54  "Brutus"  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  May  25,  1881.  For 
a  list  of  Federal  appropriations  for  North  Carolina  in  the  rivers  and 
harbors  bill  the  year  previous,  see  Observer,  Raleigh,  May  6,  1880. 
It  was  said,  apropos  of  the  approaching  meeting  of  the  Southern 
Press  Association,  that  the  Associated  Press  in  its  selection  of  news 
did  not  always  contribute  sufficiently  to  the  business  progress  of  the 
South.  "  The  commercial  prosperity  of  the  South  is  of  far  greater 
consequence  to  the  Southern  press  than  any  mere  political  object. 
.  .  .  Any  association,  therefore,  that  will  aid  in  .  .  .  dissemination 
of  truthful  information  about  the  social,  business  and  industrial  life 
of  the  Southern  States,  should  be  encouraged  by  those  who  control 
the  Southern  press "  (News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March  29, 
1881).  "It  is  time  to  stop  impeaching  the  South's  development,  for 
.  .  .  business  is  driving  sentimental  politics  to  the  woods"  (Spring- 
field Republican,  quoted  in  News  and  Observer,  Raleigh,  Dec.  31, 
1880).  Years  earlier  Gregg  took  McDuffie  severely  to  task  for  his 
half-hearted  entrance  into  cotton  manufacturing :  "  Had  you  .  .  . 
mixed  a  little  more  patriotism  with  your  efforts,  you  would  have 
taken  the  pains  to  ascertain  why  your  Vaucluse  establishment  did 
not  realize  .  .  .  sanguine  expectations.  .  .  .  You  would  have  put 
your  own  shoulders  to  the  wheel.  .  .  ."  Instead  of  political  oppo- 
sition to  protection  (Gregg  did  not  favor  a  tariff),  McDuffie  should 
have  advocated  turning  it  to  economic  advantage  (Domestic  Indus- 
try, p.  8).  "It  would  indeed  be  well  for  us,  if  we  were  not  so  re- 
fined in  politics — if  the  talent,  which  has  been,  for  years  past,  and  is 
now  engaged  in  embittering  our  indolent  people  against  their  indus- 
trious neighbors  of  the  North,  had  been  .  .  .  engaged  in  .  .  .  the 
encouragement  of  the  mechanical  arts"  (ibid.,  pp.  7-8).    Cf.  Ingle, 


94  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [200 

1880  that  men  like  Gregg,  pleading  that  "politicians,  in- 
stead of  teaching  us  to  hate  our  Northern  brethren,  en- 
deavor to  get  up  a  good  feeling  for  domestic  industry,"55 
and  who  were  overborne  by  such  followers  of  Dew  as  Cal- 
houn, Simms,  Hammond,  Rhett,  Davis,  Yancey,  and 
Cheves,58  could  be  justified  in  the  public  judgment  as  ex- 
pressed by  Grady  when  he  said :  "  Every  man  within  the 
sound  of  my  voice,  under  the  deeper  consecration  he  offers 
to  the  Union,  will  consecrate  himself  to  the  South.  Have 
no  ambition  but  to  be  first  at  her  feet  and  last  at  her  serv- 
ice. .  .  ,"57 

Nearly  every  stage  of  this  study  testifies  to  the  large  ex- 
tent to  which  such  economic  publicists  as  these,  by  conscious 
teaching  and  by  example,  were  responsible  for  industrial 
growth.  It  is  a  nice  matter  to  strike  a  balance  between  the 
force  of  their  inner  promptings  and  the  external  influences 
operating  upon  them.  It  has  been  seen  that  their  identical 
philosophy,  held  by  earlier  Southerners,  could  not  bear 
fruit  before  1880,  and  certainly  from  this  date  forward 
moral  stimulus  gathered  strength  from  the  constantly  more 
apparent  physical  advantages  for  manufacturing.  As  to 
whether  desire  for  industry  uncovered  facilities,  or  facili- 
ties for  industry  suggested  their  employment,  a  careful 
thinker  said :  "  My  answer  is  for  the  ideas,  the  internal  stim- 
ulus, but  subject  to  the  qualification  that  in  a  longer  time  we 
would  have  had  the  mills  by  force  of  external  influence. 
So  far  as  the  period  from  1880  to  1900  was  concerned,  it 

Southern  Sidelights,  p.  40;  Andrews,  South  since  the  War,  p.  96). 
The  "  old  dislike  of  the  peddling,  money-making  Yankee  is  being 
replaced  by  admiration  for  his  thrift,  and  desire  to  adopt  the  means 
by  which  he  has  left  his  impress  upon  the  nation's  life"  (Springfield 
Republican,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  April  7,  1881). 
One  who  now  feels  this  view  has  been  overemphasized  said,  speak- 
ing of  the  lack  of  strong  men  in  politics  in  South  Carolina,  "  they 
have  gone  into  this  great  economic  movement,  and  let  most  other 
things  go  to  the  dogs"  (Mrs.  M.  P.  Gridley,  int.,  Greenville,  Sept. 
9,  1916). 

55  See  Domestic  Industry,  pp.  14-16;  11,  24;  Olmsted,  Seaboard 
Slave  States,  p.  363. 

56  Dodd,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  p.  568  ff. ;  Kohn, 
Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  13. 

57  Dyer,  in  New  South,  p.  90. 


20l]  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  95 

was  as  nearly  the  immediate  result  of  internal  agitation  as 
any  industrial  growth  could  be."  It  is  probably  correct  to 
conclude  that  "  the  social  and  economic  influences  cooper- 
ated with  the  human  purpose."58 

Enough  has  been  said  to  make  it  apparent  that  at  the 
outset  the  employment  of  children  in  the  mills,  if  not  abso- 
lutely necessary,  was  practically  so,  and  never  excited  the 
least  question.  Search  has  failed  to  reveal  one  instance  of 
protest  against  their  working,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  cotton 
manufacturing  was  hailed  as  a  boon  especially  because  it 
gave  means  of  livelihood  to  women  and  children.  Poverty- 
stricken,  the  South  was  mustering  every  resource  to  stagger 
to  its  feet.  All  labor  power  was  empirically  seized  upon; 
response  was  eager.  At  that  critical  juncture,  later  results 
of  the  employment  of  children  could  not  be  looked  to.  The 
great  morality  then  was  to  go  to  work.  The  use  of  children 
was  not  avarice  then,  but  philanthropy ;  not  exploitation, 
but  generosity  and  cooperation  and  social-mindedness.59 

58  "vy.  W.  Ball,  int.,  Columbia,  Jan.  3,  1917.  "  The  building  of  the 
Pelzer  Mill  was  the  germination  of  the  idea  implanted  by  The  News 
and  Courier."  A  competent  student  wrote :  "  The  growth  of  cotton 
manufacturing  ...  is  significant  of  a  change  in  Southern  ideals  .  .  . 
a  change  from  a  social  system  in  which  work  was  held  to  be  degrad- 
ing, to  one  in  which  great  interest  is  taken  in  industrial  enterprise" 
(Copeland,  pp.  32-33).  Sir  Horace  Plunkett  said  unhesitatingly  of 
a  development  not  far  different :  "  The  story  of  the  new  movement 
.  .  .  begins  in  the  year  1889,  when  a  few  Irishmen  ...  set  them- 
selves the  task  of  bringing  home  to  the  rural  population  .  .  .  the 
fact  that  their  prosperity  was  in  their  own  hands  ...  to  arouse  and 
apply  the  latent  capacities  of  the  .  .  .  people  .  .  ."  (cf.  pp.  178-179). 
An  objective  judgment  is:  "Other  industrial  conditions  beside  the 
nearness  to  the  cotton  crop  produced  this  growth,  chief  of  which  has 
been  the  general  industrial  awakening  experienced  by  the  South " 
(New  International  Encyclopaedia,  article  on  "Cotton,"  p.  159). 
Mr.  Brooks  leans  toward  environment  when  he  says :  "  In  .  .  .  nat- 
ural resources  the  South  has  found  the  basis  of  .  .  .  new  economic 
policy,  a  new  social  order  .  .  ."  (p.  214). 

59  Between  1880  and  1890  the  number  of  children  was  doubled, 
and  between  1890  and  1900  trebled  (cf.  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufac- 
tures, 1890,  "  Cotton  Manufacture,"  by  Stanwood,  p.  173 ;  ibid.,  1900, 
p.  33).  "Manufacturers  took  whom  they  could  get  for  operatives 
in  the  new  mills.  The  employment  of  children  was  not  a  matter  of 
choice  but  of  necessity.  .  .  ."  Cf.  Edmonds,  p.  20.  It  must  be  re- 
membered, too,  that  whole  families  were  transferred  from  farms  to 
mill  villages,  which  alone,  in  the  then  condition  of  the  South,  would 
have  required  that  the  children  work.     Of  course,  the  use  of  chil- 


g6  the  rise  of  cotton  mills  in  the  south     [202 

Understanding  that  the  South,  from  inner  impulse,  en- 
vironmental suggestion  and  the  union  of  these  two,  was 
determined  for  manufacturing,  the  immediate  reasons  for 
the  building  of  mills  may  now  be  considered.  It  must  be 
remembered  that  there  is  a  distinction  between  industrial 
advantages  believed  to  be  present,  and  facilities  as  they 
were  afterwards  proved  out.  In  the  next  pages  the  effort 
is  to  discover  the  thought  back  of  the  erection  of  factories, 
rather  than  the  evaluation  of  supposed  advantages  as  re- 
vealed in  actual  operation. 

It  is  clear,  first,  that  there  could  be  no  single  proximate 
cause.  A  mill  president  said:  "You  cannot  find  any  uni- 
formity in  the  reasons  for  establishment  of  mills.  There 
were  a  thousand  reasons.  Sometimes  it  was  salaries  that 
were  wanted ;  sometimes  commission  houses  that  were  after 
the  charges ;  sometimes  it  was  to  build  up  the  community ; 
sometimes  the  profits  of  one  mill  that  brought  another  into 
being;  sometimes  the  machinery  men;  sometimes  it  was  just 
because  they  were  .  .  .  fools."60 

When  Mr.  Edmonds  declared  that  "What  the  South  has 
done  .  .  .  has  been  without  any  special  stimulus,"  he  meant 
there  were  few  demonstrated  aids  to  manufacturing  in  the 

dren  has  long  since  become  unnecessary,  and  has  been  as  cruelly 
unjust  as  at  first  it  was  natural.  Cf.  the  writer's  "  Some  Factors  in 
the  Future  of  Cotton  Manufacture  in  the  South,"  in  Manufacturers' 
Record,  Baltimore,  May  10,  1917,  and  "  The  End  of  Child  Labor,"  in 
Survey,  Aug.  23,  1919.  Some  of  Murphy's  eloquent  pleas  for  aboli- 
tion of  child  labor,  while  courageous  and  fitting  when  he  wrote,  did 
not,  perhaps,  recognize  sufficiently  the  facts  of  the  inception  of  the 
system.  Cf.  Present  South,  pp.  114,  142-143,  147;  George  T.  Win- 
ston, "  Child  Labor  in  North  Carolina,"  in  Pamphlet  262  of  National 
Child  Labor  Committee,  p.  1  ff.  For  a  statement  true  for  the 
eighties  but  not  for  1916,  see  Hearings  before  Committee  on  Labor, 
House  of  Representatives,  January,  1916,  p.  12. 

60  Landon  A.  Thomas,  int.,  Augusta,  Ga.,  Dec.  29,  1916.  Others 
gave  similar  medleys :  "  I  think  the  chief  advantages  observed  were 
the  possession  of  ample  raw  material  and  cheap  motive  power.  .  .  . 
Also,  cheaper  common  labor,  and  .  .  .  the  fact  that  the  climate  .  .  . 
is  ...  a  good  one  .  .  ."  (S.  S.  Broadus,  Decatur,  Ala.,  letter,  Jan. 
27,  1915)-  "Mills  were  located  about  Spartanburg  because  they  had 
cotton  to  grow  to  their  doors,  water  power,  tax  exemption,  encour- 
agement in  railroads  giving  two-thirds  rate  on  machinery  and  mate- 
rial hauled,  and  willingness  of  supply  men  to  take  stock "  (J.  B. 
Cleveland,  int.,  Spartanburg). 


203]  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLs  97 

beginning;  he  neglected  to  take  account  of  the  subjective 
factor  of  popular  resolve  which  flourished  just  because  of 
the  surrounding  poverty.61  "  To  help  the  city  of  Charles- 
ton and  the  people  was  the  simple  reason  for  starting  the 
Charleston  Manufacturing  Company.  The  projectors 
thought  the  time  had  come  for  Charleston  to  do  its  part ; 
they  had  been  sending  a  good  deal  of  money  to  the  Pied- 
mont mills  and  they  thought  they  would  build  one  at 
home."62 

It  is  not  hard  to  discern  several  specific  influences  mak- 
ing for  the  industrial  development,  and  these  may  be  ex- 
amined separately,  bearing  in  mind  that  all  of  them,  in  vary- 
ing degree,  doubtless  bore  a  part. 

Some,  especially  in  North  Carolina,  have  found  a  cause 
in  manufacturing  made  necessary  during  the  Civil  War. 
The  State,  urged  by  Governor  Ellis  and  Governor  Clark, 
became  a  workhouse  for  the  production  of  war  supplies 
and  goods  no  longer  obtainable  from  outside.  It  is  said  that 
a  vision  of  what  lay  in  manufactures  was  firmly  imbedded 
in  the  North  Carolina  mind,  and  that  after  Reconstruction 
the  people  went  back  to  industry.63 

61  Facts  about  South,  pp.  20,  22.  Contrast  R.  M.  R.  Dehn,  The 
German  Cotton  Industry,  pp.  13,  16. 

62  George  W.  Williams,  int.,  Charleston,  S.  C,  Dec.  27,  1916.  Cf. 
a  statement  respecting  development  of  English  economic  thought,  in 
Edwin  Cannan,  Theories  of  Production  and  Distribution,  ed.  of 
1894,  pp.  147-148. 

63  D.  H.  Hill,  int.,  Raleigh,  N.  C,  Sept.  16,  1016.  Governor  Clarkr 
in  his  message  to  the  Legislature,  August  16,  1861,  stated  the  situa- 
tion :  "  First,  that  in  our  commercial  relations  we  have  been  depend- 
ent on  the  North  for  almost  every  article  that  we  use  connected  with 
machinery,  farming,  merchandise,  food  and  clothing  .  .  .  including 
almost  every  article  we  need  for  our  defence.  The  second  and  more 
important  fact  is  now  established,  that  we  have  the  means  and  mate- 
rial for  supplying  all  these  wants  within  our  own  borders.  Neces- 
sity is  developing  these  resources  and  driving  us  to  the  use  of  them. 
The  continuance  of  this  war  and  blockade  for  two  or  three  years 
may  inflict  much  personal  suffering,  but  it  will  surely  accomplish 
our  national  and  commercial  independence."  Many  cotton  mills 
were  chartered  in  North  Carolina  during  the  war.  "  War  changes 
the  habits  of  a  people.  After  the  Revolutionary  War  and  the  second 
war  with  England  America  relied  less  on  England  and  became  self- 
supporting.  The  Civil  War  changed  the  habits  of  the  Southern 
people  and  made  them  rely  on  their  own  skill  and  energy  for  every 
necessity  of  life.    Where  there  was  no  skill,  attempts  were  made  to 

7 


98  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN   THE    SOUTH        [204 

Conveniently  mentioned,  too,  in  connection  with  North 
Carolina  is  the  thought  that  certain  groups  of  immigrants 
had  planted  their  manufacturing  tradition.  This  has  been 
referred  to  in  the  previous  chapter,  and  it  will  be  remem- 
bered that  slavery  and  agriculture  forbade  these  foreigners 
making  a  lasting  public  impression.  By  maintaining  an  oc- 
cupation in  particular  families,  however,  late  members  of 
which  came  to  bear  in  the  industrial  awakening,  they  did  a 
service.64 

Entertaining  a  synthetic  rather  than  analytic  viewpoint,  it 
has  been  sometimes  said,  with  empirical  reasoning,  that  in- 
dustry in  the  South  grew  out  of  a  natural  recovery  follow- 
ing the  war.  While  not  accounting  very  well  for  a  change 
of  mind  that  was  certainly  present,  this  argument  has  point. 
A  survey  of  South  Carolina  in  1884  asserted :  "  The  State 
has  now  recovered  the  ground  .  .  .  lost  by  emancipation, 
by  negro  suffrage,  by  political  misrule  and  official  corrup- 
tion. .  .  .  Since  the  redemption  and  regeneration  of  the 
State,  in  1877,  the  growth  of  manufactures  has  been  aston- 
ishing in  its  rapidity  and  volume.  Agricultural  operations 
could  be  carried  on  with  reasonable  success,  in  even  the 
darkest  days  of  strife  and  'misrule,  but  the  undertakings 
which  were  dependent  on  the  concentration  of  capital  for 
their  development  remained  torpid,  if  not  dead,  until  the 

develop  it"  (Brooks, pp.  199-200).  That  "a  new  form  of  expression 
of  patriotism  took  the  place  of  military  service  "  after  the  Revolu- 
tion,— encouragement  of  home  industry — is  clear;  it  may  be  held 
that  such  economic  patriotism  was  delayed  in  the  South  by  Recon- 
struction following  the  Civil  War,  and  that  industrial  progress  was 
thus  "the  result  of  both  moral  and  economical  forces"  (cf.  U.  S. 
Census  of  Manufactures,  1880,  "  Factory  System  of  U.  S.,"  by  Car- 
roll D.  Wright,  p.  6). 

64  Cf.  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  pp.  313-314- 
In  a  few  instances,  it  is  true,  local  communities  were  given  an  indus- 
trial character  that  resisted  an  enervating  economic  environment. 
Germans  at  Wachovia,  in  North  Carolina,  within  a  year  after  settle- 
ment had  in  operation  a  flour  mill,  carpenter,  shoe  and  blacksmith 
shops,  pottery,  tannery  and  cooperage  establishments  (M.  R.  Pleas- 
ants, unpublished  MS.,  "  Manufacturing  in  N.  C,"  p.  5).  Cf.  Tomp- 
kins, History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  i,  pp.  24-25;  Olmsted,  p.  511. 
Winston-Salem,  N.  C,  owes  much  to  its  Moravian  settlers. 


205] 


THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  99 


return    of   confidence   breathed   into   them    new   life    and 
vigor."65 
A  similar  account  was  given  twenty  years  afterward : 

The  war  destroyed  the  capital  and  property  of  the  South  .  .  .  and 
left  in  its  wake  a  grinding  poverty.  .  .  .  The  problem  of  procuring 
wherewithal  to  feed  and  clothe  themselves,  the  fight  for  a  mere  sub- 
sistence, employed  all  the  energies  ...  of  the  people.  This  poverty 
and  the  struggle  to  get  rid  of  the  carpet-bag  government,  left  no 
time  for  anything  else.  But  there  came  a  time  when  the  people 
could  pull  themselves  together  and  take  an  inventory  of  what  they 
had  accomplished  .  .  .  they  had  a  little  time  to  look  about  them, 
and  to  take  some  thought  of  the  morrow.  It  required  no  particular 
wisdom  to  see  that  here  where  the  raw  material  was  produced,  where 
natural  resources  abounded,  and  where  there  was  .  .  .  the  steadiest 
and  most  intelligent  class  of  labor,  that  in  this  favored  land  was  the 
essential  home  of  cotton  manufacturing.  So  it  became  merely  a 
question  of  providing  capital  with  which  to  buy  some  machinery,  the 
transfer  of  labor  from  the  farm  to  the  mill,  and  the  South's  career 
as  a  manufacturing  people  was  fairly  begun.66 

The  war  and  Reconstruction  took  one  generation  of  ac- 
tivity; by  1880  the  South  had  convalesced.  "We  took  our 
minds  off  the  war,  and  began  thinking  about  home  affairs." 
Before  1880  there  was  a  great  social  pressure  that  pre- 
vented attention  to  constructive  measures.67 

65  News  and  Courier,  South  Carolina  in  1884.  "  We  shall  see  how 
the  people  of  this  section,  reduced  to  poverty  by  .  .  .  war,  .  .  .  be- 
stirred themselves  cheerfully,  amid  the  ashes  and  waste  of  their 
homes ;  how  they  met  new  and  adverse  conditions  with  unquailing 
courage ;  how  they  gave  themselves  cordially  to  unaccustomed  work ; 
with  what  patience  they  bore  misfortune,  and  endured  wrongs  put 
upon  them  through  the  surviving  passions  of  the  war.  .  .  .  How  .  .  . 
at  last  controlling  with  their  own  hands  their  local  affairs,  they 
began,  in  ragged  and  torn  battalions,  that  march  of  restoration  and 
development  that  has  challenged  universal  admiration.  We  shall 
see  how  .  .  .  things  despised  in  the  old  days  of  prosperity,  in  adver- 
sity won  unexpected  value.  How  frugality  came  with  misfortune, 
fortitude  with  sorrow,  and  with  necessity  invention "  (Grady,  pp. 
142-143). 

66  Southern  Cotton  Spinners'  Assn.,  proceed.  7th  Annual  Conven- 
tion, address  of  T.  C.  Guthrie,  p.  44  ff. 

67  E.  C.  Brooks,  int.,  Durham,  N.  C,  Sept.  18,  1916.  The  night  of 
the  Hayes-Tilden  election  the  informant's  father  and  uncle  sat  up 
all  night  with  their  shotguns,  expecting  trouble  with  the  negroes.  A 
representative  of  the  old  South  said :  "  From  the  close  of  the  war, 
all  through  Reconstruction  time,  we  had  it  pretty  hot.  Politics  took 
up  the  time  of  all  of  us.  The  effect  of  Reconstruction,  even  after 
we  got  rid  of  it,  lasted  us  six  or  seven  years.  When  that  blew  away, 
everything  took  on  new  life.    We  began  to  build  up  all  sorts  of 


IOO  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        |^206 

Mr.  Clark  has  pointed  out  that  with  restoration  of  confi- 
dence in  political  conditions  in  the  reconstructed  States, 
outside  capitalists  no  longer  feared  disorders  that  threat- 
ened safety  of  investments ;  and  when  work  became  a  neces- 
sity, opportunities  for  diversifying  work  were  seized 
upon.68  The  South,  of  course,  shared  in  the  country's  re- 
vival from  the  depression  that  followed  the  panic  of  1873. 
The  recovery  symbolized  in  the  return  to  specie  payments 
in  1879,  in  its  influence  on  Southern  industry,  will  be  spoken 
of  later.69 

One  is  quite  ready  to  agree  to  the  suggestion,  also,  that 
"there  was  in  the  South  a  quiet  element  of  business  and 
professional  men  who  did  not  approve  the  course  of  the 
leaders  of  the  section,  and  who,  smothered  under,  so  far 
as  public  attention  was  concerned,  kept  up  activity  and  stood 
forth  when  a  liberal  industrial  and  commercial  program 
became  the  order  of  the  day,"  and  that  the  revulsion  of 
feeling  was  not  really  so  quick  as  study  of  public  expres- 
sions might  indicate.70 

The  high  price  of  cotton  right  after  the  war  and  a. belief 
that  this  condition  would  continue  because  cotton  could  be 

enterprises "  (James  Morehead,  int.,  Greensboro,  N.  C,  Aug.  30, 
1916).  "After  they  got  straightened  out,  with  their  State  govern- 
ments in  their  own  hands,  people  began  to  feel  there  was  a  future 
for  them"  (Summerfield  Baldwin,  Sr.,  int.,  Baltimore,  Md.,  June, 
1917).  Cf.  Tompkins,  Cotton  and  Cotton  Oil,  p.  64;  Copeland,  pp. 
32-33. 

68  In  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  pp.  265-266.  This  state- 
ment is  one  of  the  best-considered  by  this  writer. 
_  69  Cf.  Clark,  in  ibid.,  pp.  262-263,  258  ff .  "  The  growth  of  popula- 
tion, the  building  of  railways,  the  accumulation  of  capital,  the  slow 
perfection  of  commercial  finance,  the  spread  of  popular  education, 
each  assisted  the  imperative  trend  toward  industrial  diversification 
and  expansion.  In  spite  of  the  panic  and  depression  .  .  .  between 
1870  and  1880  every  important  Southern  manufacture  was  completely 
rehabilitated  .  .  ."  (ibid.). 

70  Walter  S.  McNeill,  int.,  Richmond,  Va.,  Aug.  29,  1916;  M.  L. 
Bonham,  Anderson,  Sept.  10,  1916.  Another  said  there  is  nothing 
esoteric  in  the  cotton  mill  campaign,  that  the  South  was  looking 
about  for  something  to  lay  its  hand  to  and  naturally  fell  upon  the 
omnipresent  staple;  the  cables  that  moored  the  South  to  its  past  had 
worn  thin,  and  it  needed  only  some  lucky  accidents  about  1880  to 
part  the  last  strands  and  set  the  ship  free  on  her  course  (J.  L.  Hart- 
sell,  int.,  Concord,  N.  C,  Sept.  2,  1916).  Cf.  Clark,  in  South  in 
Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  pp.  254-255. 


207]  THE   RISE    OF   THE    MILLS 


IOI 


only  scantily  raised  with  free  labor,  focused  attention  again 
upon  the  staple ;  the  local  merchant  was  given  credit  at  the 
North,  and  he  in  turn  gave  credit  to  the  farmer,  who  pledged 
his  land  to  cotton.  This  temporary  restoration  of  King 
Cotton  saddled  the  farmer  with  debt  and  delayed  agricul- 
tural diversification  and  industrial  beginnings.71 

In  coming  to  the  directly  personal  factor,  the  part  of  pro- 
moters and  projectors  in  the  building  of  the  mills,  it  is  well 
to  bear  in  mind  the  caution  that  "  it  is  .  .  .  not  unnatural 
that  most  of  us  should  fall  into  the  error  of  attributing  to 
the  influence  of  prominent  individuals  or  organizations  the 
events  and  conditions  which  the  superficial  observer  regards 
as  the  creation  of  the  hour,  but  which  are  in  reality  the  out- 
come of  a  slow  and  continuous  process  of  evolution."72 

In  certain  cases  where  it  would  seem  plain  that  mills  were 
due  exclusively  to  one  man,  it  is  necessary  only  to  ask  where 
and  why  he  received  his  impulse,  to  show  that  he  was  really 
an  exponent  of  a  prevailing  tendency,  just  as  the  commu- 
nity upon  which  he  relied  for  assistance,  in  its  response  to 
his  appeal,  answered  a  little  later  to  the  same  social  stirring.73 

71  Cf.  Grady,  p.  175  ff.  For  other  references,  see  Tompkins,  Cul- 
tivation, Picking,  Baling  and  Manufacturing  of  Cotton,  pp.  5-6; 
History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  i,  pp.  150-151 ;  Thompson,  p.  59  ff. 

72  Plunkett,  p.  27.  The  mistake  has  often  been  made :  "  You  might 
write  volumes,  but  you  would  never  be  able  to  get  beyond  the  fact 
that  the  cotton  mill  development  in  Gastonia,  Gaston  County,  North 
Carolina,  and  the  whole  South,  is  the  result  of  the  fact  that  a  few 
men  had  a  vision  "  (Joseph  H.  Separk,  int.,  Gastonia,  N.  C,  Sept. 
14,  1916).  Cf.  Southern  Cotton  Spinners'  Assn.,  proceed.  7th  An- 
nual Convention,  address  of  Edward  Atkinson,  p.  89;  Cannan,  p.  23. 

73  One  of  the  sincerest  men  talked  with  said :  "  The  Gaffney  people 
never  thought  of  having  a  mill  before  I  came  back  from  the  Clifton 
village,  where  I  was  putting  up  buildings,  and  got  them  stirred  up. 
You  get  an  idea  in  another  place  where  you  happen  to  be,  and  you 
say  to  yourself :  '  Why  won't  that  work  in  our  little  town  ?  '  Well, 
you've  got  to  do  a  lot  of  talking  after  you  get  home  with  the  idea, 
but  they'll  catch  on  in  the  end.  The  people  of  Union  asked  some 
Gaffney  men  to  come  there  and  tell  them  about  the  business.  The 
professor  at  the  high  school  and  I  went  down  to  Union,  and  I  recol- 
lect I  made  them  a  right  smart  good  talk  down  there,  and  they 
caught  on  to  it  and  built  the  mills  they've  got  now.  And  that  was  a 
dead  town"  (L.  Baker,  int.,  Gaffney,  S.  C,  Sept.  13,  1916).  An 
interview  with  a  mill  official  whom  Mr.  Baker  persuaded  to  come 
to  Gaffney  showed  that  he  had  acted  so  completely  under  Mr.  Baker's 
enthusiasm  that  he  accepted  the  factory  as  a  matter  of  course.    In 


102  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE   SOUTH        [208 

It  has  been  seen  how  Murphy  pointed  out  that  the  New- 
South  was  the  child  of  the  Old  South,  fathered  in  large  de- 
gree by  the  same  leaders  who  in  less  happy  days  had  bred 
only  economic  deformities.  "  The  old  South  was  the  real 
nucleus  of  the  new  nationalism.  The  old  South  .  .  .  was 
the  true  basis  of  an  enduring  peace  between  the  sections. 
.  .  ."  And  everyone  must  share  his  regret  that  "a  doubt 
was  put  upon  its  word  given  at  Appomattox.  .  .  .  Power 
was  struck  from  its  hands.  Its  sense  of  responsibility  was 
wounded  and  confused."74 

Nothing  stands  out  more  prominently  than  that  the  South- 
ern mills  were  conceived  and  brought  into  existence  by 
Southerners.  The  impulse  was  furnished  almost  exclu- 
sively from  within  the  South,  against  much  discouragement 
from  selfish  interests  at  the  North,  and  capital  was  supplied 
by  the  South  to  the  limit  of  its  ability.75 

Coming  now  to  the  part  of  ex-Confederates  in  the  indus- 
trial regeneration  of  their  people,  it  is  apparent  with  what 
speed  they  embraced  their  new  duty  and  how  the  promise  of 
their  participation  was  welcomed  by  the  wisest  heads  in 

no  instance  did  one  personality  stand  out  as  an  almost  exclusive 
influence  more  than  in  the  development  of  mills  at  Columbia  through 
Mr.  Whaley  (Washington  Clark,  William  Banks,  W.  W.  Ball,  inter- 
views, Columbia,  S.  C,  Jan.  I,  2,  3,  respectively,  1917).  "If  I  had 
at  my  disposal  the  history  of  Major  Thos.  L.  Emry,  who  was  the 
founder  and  father  of  Roanoke  Rapids,  I  would  simply  tear  a  few 
pages  from  it  and  spread  them  across  this  space  and  you  would 
have  the  whole  story  of  the  pioneering  of  this  wonderful  industrial 
.  .  .  center"  (Charlotte  News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917). 

74  Present  South,  pp.  10-11.  Such  men  as  E.  M.  Holt,  Francis 
Fries,  J.  M.  Morehead  and  William  Gregg,  who  years  before  had 
seen  the  wisdom  of  industrial  development  along  with  agriculture 
and,  besides  the  usual  activities  of  farmer  and  legislator,  were  en- 
gaged in  building  railroads  and  mills,  could  not  have  their  way  with 
the  South.  Men  of  opposite  faith,  later  converted  to  new  courses, 
did  no  more  than  adopt  a  program  which  earlier  had  been  spurned. 
On  these  unfollowed  leaders,  see  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vols, 
xi  and  xii;  Cyclopedia  of  Eminent  and  Representative  Men  of  the 
Carolinas ;  Jerome  Dowd,  Sketches  of  Prominent  Living  North 
Carolinians  (1888)  ;  Biographical  History  of  North  Carolina;  Tomp- 
kins, Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  pp.  181,  185,  187-188;  Clark, 
in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  p.  323 ;  Copeland,  pp.  32-33 ; 
Goldsmith,  p.  4;  Southern  Cotton  Spinners'  Assn.,  proceed.  7th 
Annual  Convention,  p.  168. 

75  Cf.  Grady,  pp.  182-184,  197-198;  Edmonds,  p.  32;  Charlotte 
News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917. 


20g]  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  103 

the  North.  It  has  been  observed  that  just  as  citizens  of 
Salem,  Massachusetts,  established  a  club  where  descend- 
ants of  the  witches  and  of  those  who  hanged  them  toast  one 
another,  so  "  the  same  people  that  turn  out,  by  the  city- full, 
to  build  Lee's  monument  and  to  bury  Davis,  are  taxing 
themselves  for  the  schooling  of  negro  children.  .  .  ."  Each 
of  these  Southerners,  "devoutly  remembering  the  old; 
understanding  as  no  one  else  can  why  he  remembers  it;  but 
all  the  time  looking  for  something  not  only  better  and  larger 
than  he  has  known,  but  grander  than  any  one  ever  dared 
to  hope  for  this  side  of  heaven,"  showed  a  divine  versatility 
that  is  the  very  stuff  of  civilization.76 

James  L.  Orr,  soon  to  be  governor  of  his  State,  was  a 
type  man,  and  he  appeared  with  others  of  the  same  persua- 
sion in  South  Carolina  as  early  as  the  constitutional  con- 
vention of  1865.  There  was  nothing  sullen  about  him; 
what  he  did,  he  did  whole-heartedly.  "  He  was  considered 
one  of  the  coolest-headed  men  in  the  State  five  years  ago 
this  summer;  but,  for  all  that,  he  was  one  of  the  leading 
members  in  the  Secession  Convention,  and  in  the  Rebel 
Senate  during  the  whole  existence  of  the  Confederate  gov- 
ernment. Now  he  is  one  of  the  leading  reconstructionists. 
.  .  .  He  .  .  .  carries  himself  with  a  very  democratic  air."77 

Often  reprobated  at  the  North,  this  was  as  normal  as  it 
was  fortunate;  Southerners  would  choose  those  in  whom 
they  had  rested  old  confidences  because  people  and  spokes- 
men had  made  a  mental  readjustment  which,  however  unbe- 
lievable to  enemies,  was  easy  and  natural.78  A  Northern 
observer  not  over-disposed  to  find  good  in  the  beaten  South, 
disagreed  with  those  who  wished  to  antagonize  and  hinder 

76 A.  D.  Mayo,  "Is  There  a  New  South?",  in  Social  Economist, 
Oct.,  1893,  pp.  201-202;  cf.  ibid.,  p.  207. 

_  77  Andrews,  p.  50.  The  promptness  with  which  distinguished  par- 
ticipants in  the  Confederate  cause  came  forward  after  the  war  was 
an  indication  of  the  consistency  of  Southern  leadership.  Lee  was 
as  much  the  general  at  the  head  of  a  college  as  at  the  head  of  an 
army. 

78  Cf.  Dunning,  pp.  44-45.  Twelve  members  of  the  South  Caro- 
lina constitutional  convention  of  1865  had  been  members  of  the 
secession  convention  (Andrews,  pp.  38-39).  Cf.  Thompson,  pp. 
57-58. 


104  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        ^2IO 

rather  than  help  these  inevitable  leaders.  "  For  my  part," 
said  Sidney  Andrews,  "  I  wish  every  office  in  the  State 
[South  Carolina]  could  be  filled  with  ex-Confederate  sol- 
diers. It  is  the  universal  testimony  of  every  officer  of  our 
own  troops  .  .  .  that  the  late  Rebel  soldiers  are  of  better 
disposition  toward  the  government,  toward  Northerners, 
toward  progression,  than  any  other  class  of  citizens."'79 

The  year  1880  was  reached  before  these  men  could  really 
assert  themselves.  Their  training  in  politics  stood  them  in 
good  stead  when  they  came  to  organize  public  sentiment  in 
a  new  campaign,  that  of  industrial  awakening.80  Their  old 
mastery,  with  even  increased  power,  sprang  forward  to  the 
evident  task.  The  pity  is  that  they  had  not  longer  time 
left  them  in  which  to  work  for  the  South.81 
tcdJU  When  the  student  of  Southern  industry  meets  one  of  the 

few  surviving  members  of  this  company,  he  at  once  feels 
himself  in  touch  with  the  spirit  that  was  the  South's  salva- 
tion. Far-seeing,  public-minded,  generous-natured  leaders 
because  lovers  and  servers,  these  have  proved  themselves 
true  patriots.82 

79  South  since  the  War,  p.  95;  cf.  ibid.,  pp.  393,  371-372;  Dunning, 
pp.  185-186;  Tompkins,  History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  i,  pp.  151-152. 
Andrews  had  more  faith  in  a  "conquered  Rebel"  than  in  "most  of 
these  North  Carolina  Unionists"  (ibid.,  p.  167). 

80  Cf.  Punkett,  pp.  72-73. 

81  The  Industrial  South,  of  Richmond,  in  1882  was  asking  "when 
will  .  .  .  prosperity  come"  and  declared  this  especially  "the  impa- 
tient utterance  of  the  surviving  veterans  of  the  war  .  .  . — the  men 
who  were  crushed  to  the  earth  by  the  loss  of  all  their  worldly  pos- 
sessions, who  have  ever  since  been  struggling  for  a  footing  in  life 
again,  and  who  are  looking  longingly  for  some  assurance  .  .  .  that 
their  children  and  their  children's  children  will  have  large  oppor- 
tunities for  improvement  of  their  fortunes  through  the  exercise  of 
energy  in  utilizing  the  bounties  of  nature  around  them  "  (quoted  in 
Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  June 
17,  1882). 

82  It  is  worth  while  setting  down  impressions  of  one  or  two.  A 
ruddy,  white-haired  old  gentleman,  cordial,  cultivated,  and  a  little 
shyly  if  gladly  reminiscent,  received  me  in  the  office  of  his  ship 
chandlering  store  in  Bay  Street,  Charleston.  He  showed  by  look 
and  phrase  and  occasionally  by  direct  remark  that  he  had  been 
nicely  familiar  with  all  the  details  of  the  important  mill  project  in 
which  he  had  taken  a  chief  part,  and  that  they  had  been  obscured, 
never  obliterated,  by  the  years.  Almost  with  a  child's  embarrass- 
ment he  explained  he  did  not  know  why  he  had  kept  a  packet  of 


2Il[]  THE    RISE    OF   THE    MILLS  I  OS 

It  was  natural,  at  the  evening  of  the  period,  that  many 
cotton  factors  should  head  mill  enterprises.  They  had 
some  money,  business  connections  and  a  knowledge  of  the 
staple  that  was  important.  Frequently  they  had  been 
buyers  for,  and  stockholders  and  directors  in,  some  of  the 
first  enterprises.  Charleston  cotton  merchants  played  a 
leading  role.  Captain  F.  T.  Pelzer  is  a  case  in  point;  he 
made  money  in  cotton  right  after  the  war,  was  a  director  in 
Hammett's  Piedmont  Factory,  became  interested  in  several 
other  ventures  and  ended  by  founding  the  mill  bearing  his 
name.83  Sometimes  factors  were  already  executives  of 
mills  established  before  1880,  and  went  into  manufacturing 
more  deeply  when  industrial  development  became  a  fixed 
policy.84     A  cotton  buyer  for  Hammett's  Piedmont  mill, 

intimate  memoranda  concerning  a  devoted  but  unsuccessful  venture, 
and  handed  them  over  to  me  with  charges  for  their  safe  return. 
Another,  nearly  ninety-eight  years  old  when  interviewed,  sat  in  the 
office  of  the  mill  which  he  built  and  of  which  he  had  long  been 
president.  He  wore  a  greenish-black,  threadbare  overcoat,  and 
clutched  a  bulging  umbrella  of  the  same  sort.  Clear-brained,  almost 
excessively  direct,  of  dominating  personality,  one  felt  he  had  always 
been  equal  to  the  tasks  confronting  him.  As  he  looked  about  at  the 
bookkeepers,  he  spoke  with  much  emphasis,  to  soften  the  too  piti- 
fully evident  chagrin  at  being  dispossessed.  His  successor,  exulting 
in  what  has  been  called  "juvenile  capitalism,"  had  little  of  the 
affection  of  the  old  man  for  the  enterprise.  Here  was  the  South  of 
slavery,  agriculture  and  aristocracy,  that  made  the  South  of  free 
labor,  industry  and  democracy.  A  writer  on  the  mills  has  said : 
"  These  little  personal  things  will  creep  into  my  story  and  break  the 
continuity  of  dry  developments,  but  the  human  element  pulsates  so 
frequently  through  the  proposition  that  I  must  be  excused  if  I  fly 
off  at  a  tangent  at  almost  any  word  and  mix  up  the  material  and  the 
psychological"  (Charlotte  News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917,  concerning  Roa- 
noke Mills).  Cf.  ibid.,  concerning  Edenton  Cotton  Mill;  Southern 
Cotton  Spinners'  Assn.,  proceed.  7th  Annual  Convention,  p.  44  ff. 

83  Frank  Pelzer  and  William  Banks,  interviews,  Charleston,  Dec. 
28,  1916,  and  Columbia,  Jan.  2,  1917.  Col.  W.  G.  Smith  was  a  cotton 
buyer  in  Orangeburg  County,  S.  C.,  before  organizing  a  mill  there. 
Leroy  Springs,  in  his  mercantile  business  at  Lancaster,  took  cotton 
in  exchange  for  goods.  A  little  later  it  will  be  noticed  how  he 
became  a  cotton  manufacturer  (Banks,  ibid.).  The  same  is  true 
of  John  H.  Montgomery  (cf.  Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  Oct., 
1916). 

84  Thus  "  William  C.  Sibley,  the  president  of  this  company,  has 
had  a  long  experience  in  cotton,  and  is  one  of  the  largest  cotton 
buyers  of  the  Southern  States.  .  .  .  He  is  at  present  handling,  and 
has  for  many  years  .  .  .  efficiently  handled,  the  corporate  affairs  0$ 
the  Langley  mills  .  .  ."  (Boston  Journal  of  Commerce,  July  29, 
1882). 


106  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [212 

after  plans  to  invite  him  to  Anderson  had  fallen  through, 
started  a  factory  on  his  own  account. 

By  no  means  all  of  the  mill  builders  had  direct  or  even 
indirect  connection  with  cotton.  How  thoroughly  local 
most  enterprises  were  and  how  general  in  communities  was 
the  desire  for  mills,  is  seen  in  the  callings  from  which  men 
came  to  cotton  manufacturing.  Lawyers,  bankers,  farmers, 
merchants,  teachers,  preachers,  doctors,  public  officials — any 
man  who  stood  out  among  his  neighbors,  or  whose  eco- 
nomic position  allowed  him  a  little  freedom  of  action,  was 
likely  to  be  requisitioned  into  service  or  to  venture  for  him- 
self.85 Neither  did  the  South  rely  only  upon  those  socially 
prominent,  or  upon  intellectuals.  There  was  no  authorita- 
tive leading  exposition  of  the  problems  facing  the  section. 
Measures  were  hit  upon  by  intuition,  by  force  of  circum- 
stance, because  of  pressing  necessity  and  first-apparent  op- 
portunity.   It  was  a  movement  of  the  whole  South.86 

Especially  did  merchants  become  mill  builders.  When 
large  plantations  broke  down  into  small  farms  and  tenant 
holdings,  factors  at  the  ports  could  no  longer  market  the 
whole  cotton  crop  or  supply  needed  credit,  because  they  did 
not  have  knowledge  of  local  conditions.  Merchants,  many 
of  them  mere  country  storekeepers,  found  themselves  more 
than  ever  drawn  into  the  buying  and  selling  of  the  staple, 
and  lending  money  on  growing  crops.  Supplying  every 
material  want  of  the  farmer  and  taking  his  incoming  cotton 
in  surety,  the  merchant  was  the  pivot  of  the  economic  sys- 
tem. These  merchants,  more  than  anyone  else  in  their  com- 
munities, had  credit  relations  at  the  North,  the  importance 
of  which  in  their  manufacturing  enterprises  will  be  ob- 
served in  the  chapter  on  capital.87     They  had  an  interest 

85  Cf .  Goldsmith,  pp.  7-8.  "  All  that  was  necessary  was  that  the 
promoter  of  the  mill  should  have  succeeded  in  the  business  in  which 
he  had  been  formerly  engaged." 

86  Cf.  Plunkett,  p.  133  ff. 

87  Cf.  Hammond,  p.  144  ff.  The  description  of  usury  in  sales  on 
"time"  applies  over  much  of  the  South  today.  I  heard  of  a  North 
Carolina  farmer  who,  in  1920,  with  cotton  prices  unprecedentedly 
high,  was  asked  half  of  his  crop  in  payment  for  fertilizer. 


213]]  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLs  107 

in  the  prosperity  of  their  localities  that  was  none  the  less 
effective  because  not  always  academic  or  sentimental.88 

The  man  who  later  had  capital  to  head  cotton  mills  at 
Clinton,  South  Carolina,  set  up  the  only  store  in  the  place 
immediately  following  the  War.  The  town  was  then  in  a 
poor  way,  and1  not  being  helped  by  several  barrooms.89 
Leroy  Springs  operated  a  general  mercantile  business  in 
Lancaster,  South  Carolina.  A  new  railway  came  through 
the  town,  but  some  thriving  young  places  sprang  up  along 
it  and  drew  business  from  Lancaster,  which  came  to  a 
standstill,  was  "  dead."  Realizing  that  something  must  be 
done  to  keep  business  going  in  Lancaster,  the  merchant, 
with  a  small  capital,  built  a  cotton  mill.  It  had  the  desired 
effect.90  In  a  conspicuous  instance  a  mercantile  firm  outside 
of  the  South  entered  the  industry  in  a  similar  way.  Ap- 
pealed to  by  Southern  customers  to  take  stock  in  local  mill 
undertakings,  a  Baltimore  groceries  house  came  to  have 
large  manufacturing  interests,  and  ultimately  changed  over 
to  making  and  selling  cotton  goods. 

The  moving  man  in  the  Charleston  Manufacturing  Com- 
pany was  half  merchant  a9  head  of  the  ice  company.91 

Saying  that  Massachusetts  mills  created  only  in  quantity 
values  that  Rhode  Island  manufacturers  produced  through 
quality  of  goods,  William  Gregg  years  before  saw  that  the 
Massachusetts  method  would  first  be  introduced  in  the 
South,  and  said :  "  Cotton  manufacturing  will  not,  probably, 
be  speedily  introduced  into  this  State  [South  Carolina], 
unless  our  business  men  of  capital  take  hold  of  it.  Mer- 
chants and  retired  men  of  capital  may  erect  factories,  .  .  . 

88  Mr.  Clark  is  hardly  justified  in  asserting  that  "  The  conditions 
were  no  longer  those  that  attract  a  few  hardy  adventurers  into  a  new 
field  of  business,  but  such  as  draw  conservative  capital,  in  large  units 
and  in  the  hands  of  trained  administrators,  to  assured  spheres  of 
enterprise"  (cf.  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  pp.  266-267). 
Administrators  were  rarely  trained  and  large  investments  of  capital 
were  rarely  for  dividends  only. 

89  Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  1916.  Cf.  ibid,  respecting  John 
R.  Barron's  Manchester  Cotton  Mills. 

90  Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  1916. 

91  Cf.  advertisement  of  Alva  Gage  &  Co.,  Deutsche  Zeitung, 
Charleston,  1881. 


108  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH       ^214 

our  wealthy  planters  may  engage  in  this  business  .  .  .  but 
it  will  be  long  before  the  Southern  States  shall  have  a  set 
of  'manufacturers  similar  to  those  in  Rhode  Island ;  they 
must  grow  up  among  us.  .  .  ,"92  When  at  length  Gregg's 
advice  was  being  followed,  and  entrepreneurs  had  to  be 
recruited  quickly,  it  is  surprising  how  few  failures  ap- 
peared. True,  they  were  not  manufacturers  in  Gregg's 
sense,  but  they  worked  under  natural  advantages  which 
well-nigh  insured  success.93 

Mr.  Estes'  entry  into  manufacturing  was  typical.  "  I  was 
first  in  the  dry  goods  business,  then  the  grocery  business. 
I  was  mayor  here  for  six  years.  I  was  successful.  They 
got  me  to  get  up  the  mill.  Old  Judge  King  took  first  $50,000 
and  then  $100,000  of  stock,  with  the  idea  that  I  was  to  be 
president."94 

92  Domestic  Industry,  p.  27. 

93  Some  mistakes  there  were  bound  to  be,  when  an  industry  was 
being  built  overnight.  "  Gen.  Irving  Walker,  a  stationery  man,  was 
the  first  president  of  the  Charleston  Manufacturing  Company.  He 
was  a  nice  man,  but  he  knew  nothing  about  the  business.  That  was 
at  the  bottom  of  nine-tenths  of  the  failures  of  cotton  mills  in  this 
State — the  presidents  were  popular,  you  know,  everybody  liked  them, 
but  they  were  incompetent,  with  no  technical  knowledge."  The 
founder  of  one  mill,  mayor  of  his  city,  was  denominated  "  a  hot  air 
politician."  The  type  of  man  who  could  succeed  in  the  eighties 
usually  fails  now.  Mills  at  Bessemer  City,  North  Carolina,  are 
illustrative.  There  is  no  longer  the  leeway.  Cf.  Thompson,  p.  272. 
"  Looking  back  on  them,"  one  informant  said,  "  I  can  see  that  the 
first  mill  men  were  a  set  of  blundering  children,  some  a  little  more 
apt  than  others."  Cf.  Ga.  Indus.  Assn.,  proceed.  4th  Annual  Con- 
vention, address  of  J.  J.  Spalding,  pp.  46-47,  and  the  writer's  "  Some 
Factors  in  Future  of  Cotton  Manufacture  in  South,"  in  Manufac- 
turers' Record,  Baltimore,  May  10,  1917.  Newer  manufacturers, 
though  still  bearing  marks  of  neglected  training,  are  supplementing 
"  a  deep  desire  to  succeed,  faith  in  the  soundness  of  the  task  and 
in  one's  own  self,  and  business  and  social  imagination  "  with  intimate 
knowledge  of  detail.  Cf.  Charlotte  News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917,  for 
many  instances,  especially  that  of  C.  B.  Armstrong. 

94  Charles  Estes,  int.,  Augusta,  Ga.,  Dec.  29,  1916.  "  When  this 
enterprise  was  inaugurated  there  were  those  who  doubted  whether 
the  mill  would  ever  be  built,  but  with  Mr.  Charles  Estes,  to  whom, 
by  universal  consent,  the  work  of  organizing  the  company  was  in- 
trusted, there  is  no  such  word  as  fail  .  .  ."  (newspaper  clipping  in 
Raworth  Scrapbook).  "Mr.  A.  Scheurman,  a  leading  merchant  of 
Griffin,  Ga.,  is  now  closing  out  his  business  with  the  intention  of 
engaging  in  cotton  manufacturing  .  .  .  (Manufacturers'  Record, 
Baltimore,  Dec.  14,  1882).  Cf.  Grady,  p.  181 ;  Southern  Cotton  Spin- 
ners' Assn.,  proceed.  7th  Annual  Convention,  pp.  111-1x2. 


2I5J  THE   RISE    OF   THE    MILLS  IO9 

If  space  .permitted,  a  review  of  the  histories  of  H.  P. 
Hammett,  G.  A.  Gray,  R.  C.  G.  Love,  Daniel  Rhyne,  and 
others  would  show  interestingly  the  channels  by  which  chief 
leaders  came  to  build  mills.  Hammett  and  Gray  were  both 
linked  with  the  ante-bellum  industry.  The  former  grew  up 
on  a  farm,  taught  school,  married  the  daughter  of  William 
Bates  and  was  taken  into  his  cotton  manufacturing  com- 
pany ;  he  entered  the  Civil  War  and  was  given  duty  in  the 
Confederate  tax  office.  After  the  war  he  represented  his 
native  county  in  the  State  legislature,  was  mayor  of  Green- 
ville, 'made  president  of  a  rundown  railroad  and,  knowing 
men  of  influence  and  being  acquainted  with  an  excellent 
water  power,  built  his  mill  in  the  seventies.95  Gray  at  the. 
age  of  eight  entered  the  old  Stowe  Mill,  at  Pinhook,  Gaston 
County,  N.  C,  as  a  doffer  boy,  at  ten  cents  a  day.  He  at- 
tended school  hardly  at  all.  He  became  an  overseer  in  this 
mill  and  later  was  in  charge  of  the  installation  of  machinery 
in  various'  new  plants.  He  was  superintendent  of  several 
factories,  and  -moved  to  Gastonia  with  a  small  capital  and 
built  the  first  'mill  in  the  place.  At  the  time  of  his  death 
the  town  had  eleven  mills,  nine  of  which  he  had  been  largely 
instrumental  in  projecting.98 

D.  A.  Tompkins,  less  than  thirty  at  the  opening  of  the 
cotton  mill  era,  was  late  enough  to  profit  by  the  pioneering 
work  of  others.  There  was  enough  industry  in  the  South 
to  make  the  mill  engineer's  profession  profitable.  Tomp- 
kins was  one  of  the  first  men  in  whose  career  it  was  evident 
that  the  South  was  becoming  a  real  seat  of  the  cotton  manu- 

95  Cf .  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  pp.  180-190. 

96  Cf.  Gastonia  Gazette,  Feb.  9,  1912,  and  C.  W.  Patman  in  Knit 
Goods,  N.  Y.,  March,  1912.  Men  drawn  into  the  business  as  a  result, 
directly  or  indirectly,  of  Gray's  influence,  had  been  teachers,  public 
officials,  bankers  and  farmers.  '  Cf.  Patman,  ibid.  One  of  the  most 
successful  manufacturers  in  Gastonia  was  raised  on  a  farm  and  ran 
away  from  home  when  a  young  man  and  went  through  the  country 
peddling  clocks  and  quilts.  He  said  that  as  a  boy  he  believed  the 
treasurer  of  a  cotton  mill  the  biggest  man  in  the  country,  and  that 
he  thought  this  over  while  tramping  about  later  with  his  wares.  He 
finally  set  up  an  instalment  furniture  business  in  Gastonia,  was  made 
sheriff  and  was  elected  to  the  vice-presidency  of  a  cotton  mill.  He 
is  now  president  of  many  factories  (C.  B.  Armstrong,  int.,  Gastonia, 
N.  G,  Sept.  14,  1916). 


110  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        ^2l6 

facture,  with  facilities  for  machine  design  and  repair  and 
all  that  general  guidance  which  new  companies  needed. 
Tompkins,  unlike  his  predecessors,  had  technical  training. 
Partly  in  furtherance  of  his  engineering  business,  partly 
from  the  broadest  social  motives,  he  almost  raised  by  hand 
many  cotton  mills — inspiring  the  idea,  supervising  con- 
struction, assisting  first  steps  in  production.97 

"  When  manrifactures  have  become  well  established  a  new 
mill  is  sometimes  organized  by  a  number  of  men  who  per- 
ceive that  some  one  man  is  a  promising  manufacturer."98 
Though  frequently  exemplified  at  present,  notably  at  Gas- 
tonia,  this  was  rarely  true  in  the  early  years.  Where  an 
executive  was  not  himself  the  projector  of  a  mill,  the 
thought  that  created  it  was  not  dependent  upon  any  indi- 
vidual. Thus  a  nearby  manufacturer  was  persuaded  to 
become  president  of  a  factory  at  Albemarle,  North  Caro- 
lina; but  the  enterprise  had  its  root  in  the  local  pride  of  an 
old  farmer  of  the  place.99 

There  has  been  an  erroneous  notion  that  many  promoters 
of  mills  in  the  South  in  the  eighties  were  Northern  men  and 
firms.  In  the  beginning  cotton  manufacturers  of  New  Eng- 
land did  much  to  discourage  establishment  of  the  industry 
at  the  South,  and  have  never  sought  to  realize  Southern  ad- 
vantages in  a  large  way.  In  later  days  there  was  never 
such  an  incoming  of  Northerners  as  that  of  the  Hills,  Bates, 

97  As  an  exhibit  in  Southern  economic  history,  his  two  little  offices 
in  Charlotte  ought  really  to  be  moved  intact  to  a  place  where  they 
would  be  kept  for  the  public.  Glimpses  revealing  Tompkins'  per- 
sonality may  be  found  in  his  own  writings :  Nursing  and  Nurses,  p. 
3 ;  History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol,  i,  p.  vii ;  Cotton  and  Cotton  Oil, 
preface;  Road  Building  and  Repairs,  p.  26;  Building  and  Loan  Asso- 
ciations, preface;  a  notion  of  the  character  of  his  service  may  be 
gained  from :  Water  Power  on  the  Catawba  River,  p.  20  ff . ;  A  Plan 
to  Raise  Capital  for  Manufacturing,  p.  18  ff . ;  the  backs  of  some  of 
his  many  pamphlets  give  the  plan  of  organization  of  his  company. 

98  Tompkins,  Coton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  p.  30. 

99  J.  L.  Hartsell,  int.,  Concord.  This  was  true  of  other  mills 
headed  by  the  same  man.  A  merchant  fathered  a  mill  at  China 
Grove  quite  irrespective  of  its  later  foster  parent  (W.  R.  Odell, 
int.,  Concord,  N.  C,  Sept.  2,  1916).  At  Salisbury  the  matter  of  an 
executive  was  an  afterthought. 


217]  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  III 

Shelden,  Clark  and  Weaver.100  The  Cotton  Mill  Campaign, 
so  far  from  showing  any  of  the  antagonism  of  former  years 
toward  Northern  men  and  money,101  developed  the  most 
enthusiastic  desire  for  the  cooperation  of  any  outsiders. 
This  led  to  delighted  acclamation  of  any  reported  design  of 
Northerners  to  set  up  manufacturing  in  the  South,  but 
there  were  undoubtedly  more  reports  than  performances. 
The  Northern  observer  who  said  of  Charleston  directly 
after  the  war  that  the  city  had  not  sufficient  recuperative 
power  for  its  own  rebuilding,  and  that  New  Englanders,  if 
anyone,  must  make  it  over,  would  have  been  surprised  fif- 
teen years  later  to  see  Charlestonians  supplying  impulse  to 
their  own  city  and  really  to  the  whole  South.102 

A  Southern  writer  in  1882  said :  "  Capital  and  skill  are 
the  only  things  needed  to  make  the  South  preeminently  a 
manufacturing  country  and  shrewd,  energetic  men  from  the 
East  and  from  Europe  are  rapidly  supplying  the  defi- 
ciency."103 The  Southern  Land,  Emigration  and  Improve- 
ment Company,  a  New  York  organization,  had  as  one  of  it's 
purposes  bringing  investment  opportunities  to  the  attention 
of  Northern  capitalists.104  The  leading  railroads  travers- 
ing the  South  Atlantic  States  combined  on  a  similar  plan  in 

100  Cf.  J.  B.  O.  Landrum,  History  of  Spartanburg  County,  p.  58. 
Cf.  Dehn,  German  Cotton  Industry,  pp.  4-5. 

101  Andrews,  p.  378. 

102  Ibid.,  p.  3. 

103  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
June  3,  1882.  "  The  Barnett  Shoals  have  at  last  been  purchased  by 
Davenport,  Johnson  &  Co.,  of  New  York,  for  $22,000,  and  it  is 
thought  that  work  will  begin  here  in  a  short  time.  Athens  is  yet 
destined  to  be  the  Lowell  of  the  South"  (Athens  Banner,  quoted  in 
ibid.,  June  24,  1882).  "A  party  of  New  York  capitalists  .  .  .  visited 
the  Peach  Stone  Shoals  in  Henry  County,  Ga.,  a  few  days  ago,  and 
were  so  much  pleased  with  the  property  .  .  .  that  they  purchased  it 
with  the  intention  of  at  once  erecting  a  cotton  mill,  to  rank  as  one 
of  the  largest  and  best  equipped  in  the  South"  (Manufacturers' 
Record,  Baltimore,  March  1,  1883).  Cf.  Fredericksburg  correspond- 
ence in  Daily  Dispatch,  Richmond,  Feb.  23,  1880;  Charlotte  News, 
Textile  Ed.,  1917,  concerning  Wayne  Mill.  The  considerable  North- 
ern participation  in  Southern  mill  development,  as  in  the  Chadwick- 
Hoskins  group  and  the  Pacific  Mills,  came  much  later.  Cf.  Char- 
lotte News,  ibid. 

104  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
Aug.  5,  1882. 


112  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        \_2 1 8 

1880.105  Not  a  few  of  the  Northerners  that  undertook  in- 
dustry in  the  South  did  so  at  directly  Southern  solicitation. 
A  mill  man  of  Alabama  in  1881  was  consummating  a  con- 
tract "  by  which  a  New  England  company  of  capitalists  will 
revive  cotton  manufacturing  in  a  factory  building  at  Cor- 
inth, Miss.,"  and  he  expected  to  induce  a  Connecticut  spin- 
ner who  wished  to  come  South  to  remove  to  Huntsville, 
Alabama.106 

The  pages  of  this  study  bear  ample  testimony  to  the  power 
of  a  different  group  of  promoters  from  those  here  men- 
tioned, namely,  the  editors  of  Southern  newspapers.  Being 
peculiarly  a  public  movement,  the  cotton  mill  development 
sprang  in  large  part  from  the  activity  of  the  press.  The 
"  Federalist "  did  not  fight  harder  for  union  than  Southern 
papers,  big  and  little,  strove  for  industrial  awakening  in 
the  eighties.  By  1880  most  editors  knew  that  they  were  to 
follow  DeBow  and  not  Bledsoe,  working  for  understanding 
between  the  sections  and  not  separatism,  for  diversity  and 
not  narrowness  of  economic  pursuit.107  County  weeklies 
were  stout  followers  in  a  campaign  in  which  city  dailies 
were  leaders.  No  paper  was  more  influential  than  the 
News  and  Courier,  of  Charleston.  The  philosophy  of 
Gregg's  "  Essays  on  Domestic  Industry,"  published  in  the 
Charleston  Courier  in  1845,  was  made  concrete  in  the  News 
and  Courier's  exhortation,  "  Bring  the  mills  to  the  cotton," 
which  rang  throughout  the  South  and  was  taken  up  as  the 
rallying  cry  of  every  mover  for  industry.108 

105  Ibid.,  July  is,  1882. 

106  Huntsville  Democrat,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston, 
July  30,  1881.  Similar  bidding  for  location  of  a  business  designed 
to  be  set  up  in  the  South  has  been  seen  later  in  the  case  of  a  Phila- 
delphia carpet  manufacturer  being  brought  to  Gaffney,  S.  C. 

107  Cf .  Dodd,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  p.  546. 

108  Mr.  Hemphill  declares  this  sentence  "  resulted  in  the  conver- 
sion of  South  Carolina  in  less  than  the  life  of  a  generation  into  the 
second  cotton  manufacturing  state  of  the  nation.  .  .  ."  It  is  "  by  its 
statesmanship  and  largely  through  the  work  of  its  press"  that  the 
South  has  achieved  progress  since  the  war  (James  C.  Hemphill, 
"  The  Influence  of  the  Press  in  Southern  Economic  Development," 
in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  pp.  548-549.  _  See  this  whole 
paper  for  interesting  material).     In  1880,  in  presenting  a  survey  of 


219]  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLS  IJ3 

The  very  genius  of  the  News  and  Courier  was  its  editor, 
F.  W.  Dawson.  The  power  he  exerted  could  never  be 
duplicated  under  any  other  circumstances  than  those  of  the 
South  in  the  eighties.  His  inspiriting  force  can  scarcely  be 
overestimated.  Born  in  England  in  1840,  he  was  drawn  to 
the  Southern  cause  and  enlisted  as  a  sailor  on  the  Confed- 
erate vessel  Nashville  at  Southampton  the  opening  year  of 
the  Civil  War.  He  entered  the  army  and  was  promoted  to 
the  rank  of  captain.  After  the  war  he  worked  on  Rich- 
mond newspapers  before  becoming  one  of  the  proprietors 
of  the  Charleston  News ;  his  editorship  came  to  full  strength 
when  thi9  paper  was  consolidated  with  the  Courier.109  He 
saw  the  truth  of  the  South's  problem  and  saw  it  whole; 
that  the  people  must  drop  conceits  and  go  to  work.  Be- 
sides his  major  effort  for  cotton  'manufactures,  he  effec- 
tively urged  tobacco  cultivation  in  South  Carolina  and 
preached  against  duelling.  Doubtless  his  foreign  birth  and 
knowledge  of  English  industrialism  was  of  great  assistance 
to  him.  Of  fine  physique,  handsome,  imperious,  brilliant, 
level-headed,  "he  had  full  confidence  in  himself,  with  good 
reason.  He  was  a  godsend  to  South  Carolina — the  leader 
in  bringing  the  State  back  into  its  own."110    He  met  a  tragic 

the  mills  of  South  Carolina,  Dawson  wrote:  "Ten  years  ago  The 
News  and  Courier  formulated  what  is  now  an  accepted  truth,  in 
declaring  that  the  remedy  for  commercial  distress  in  the  North  and 
the  secret  of  sure  fortune  in  the  South  was  to  bring  the  mills  to  the 
cotton.  .  .  .  The  belief  was  that  the  manufacture  of  cotton  in  a 
cotton  producing  State  must  necessarily  pay  well,  by  reason  of  the 
saving  in  the  cost  of  the  raw  material,  by  the  saving  in  commissions, 
and  charges  for  transportation,  by  the  saving  in  waste,  in  the  rental 
of  land  .  .  .  and  in  the  wages  to  be  paid  to  operatives  .  .  ."  (Lead- 
ing article,  published  in  Blackman).  For  an  instance  of  how  this 
idea  was  acted  upon  in  Texas,  see  Manufacturers'  Record,  Balti- 
more, Nov.  23,  1882.  Dawson  stressed  the  slogan  "  Bring  the  cotton 
mills  to  the  cotton  fields"  and  associated  ideas,  "and  kept  hammer- 
ing them,  until  some  fellows  caught  the  point  and  began  to  build 
mills"  (W.  W.  Ball",  int.,  Columbia,  Jan.  1,  1917).  Interviews  with 
Messrs.  James  Simons  and  F.  Q.  O'Neill  of  Charleston  and  Tracy 
I.  Hickman,  of  Augusta,  bore  out  the  same  point.  Cf.  Kohn,  Cotton 
Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  20. 

109  Cf.  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  xi,  p.  271. 

110  Yates  Snowden,  int.,  Columbia,  S.  C,  Jan.  1,  1917.  I  am  in- 
debted to  Professor  Snowden,  of  Columbia,  and  to  Messrs.  W.  H. 
Parker,  W.  P.  Carrington,  F.  W.  Wagener  and  William  M.  Bird,  of 


I  14  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        ^220 

death,  being  murdered  in  1889  by  a  physician  whose  office 
Dawson  entered,  it  is  said,  in  order  to  resent  an  affront  to 
an  Irish  servant  girl  in  his  home.111 

Dawson  was  not  an  orator,  and  had  none  of  the  flourish 
of  Grady.  Also  because  his  attack  was  more  direct  and 
concentrated  than  that  of  his  Georgia  contemporary,  he  is 
not  so  well  known  now.  Of  Dawson  as  of  Grady  it  may  be 
said :  "  His  influence  in  exciting  hope  and  inspiring  confi- 
dence in  the  ability  of  the  South  to  cope  successfully  with 
her  difficulties  was  immeasurable.  .  .  .  '  He  did  not  tamely 
promote  enterprise  and  encourage  industry ;  he  vehemently 
fomented  enterprise  and  provoked  industry  until  they  stalked 
through  the  land.  .  .  .'"112 

The  old  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  in  February, 
1882,  began  to  devote  some  pages  to  industrial  development 
in  the  South,  changing  its  name  to  the  Journal  of  Commerce 
and  Manufacturers'  Record.  In  November  of  the  same 
year  the  Manufacturers'  Record  became  a  separate  paper, 
because  "  it  has  been  demonstrated  that  there  was  an  actual 
need   for  a  paper  which  would   adequately   represent  the 

Charleston,  for  descriptions  of  Dawson.  His  picture  shows  rather 
curly  dark  hair,  fine,  searching  eyes,  fullish  lips,  long,  somewhat 
irregular  nose  and  a  strong  jaw — the  face  of  a  thoroughbred. 

111  If  Professor  Hart  has  reason  for  a  late  statement  that  the 
News  and  Courier  "  has  for  its  stock-in-trade,  ultra  and  Bourbon 
sentiments "  and  "  represents  an  age  that  is  past,"  such  a  comment 
would  not  apply  to  the  paper's  earlier  history  (p.  70).  As  a  single 
illustration  of  its  position  in  the  South's  critical  years,  articles  writ- 
ten by  a  member  of  its  staff  and  reprinted  under  the  title  "  The 
Cotton  Mills  of  South  Carolina,"  in  this  study  referred  to  as  "  Black- 
man,"  with  a  striking  editorial  from  Dawson,  should  be  examined. 
How  dynamic  was  the  paper's  advocacy  of  industry  comes  out  in 
the  complaint  of  a  manufacturer  opposed  to  the  use  of  the  Clement 
Attachment  (a  machine  which  represented  the  extreme  of  the  doc- 
trine of  "  Bring  Mills  to  Cotton  "  in  that  it  accomplished  both  gin- 
ning and  spinning),  that  "the  newspapers  are  assuming  a  great  deal 
of  responsibility  in  giving  it  so  much  notoriety"  (Blackman,  p.  12). 

112  Dyer,  in  The  New  South,  pp.  78-79;  cf.  ibid.,  p.  128.  Grady 
gave  as  the  text  of  the  Atlanta  Constitution:  "If  the  South  can 
keep  at  home  the  $400,000,000  it  gets  annually  for  its  cotton  crop, 
it  will  soon  be  rich  beyond  comprehension.  As  long  as  she  sends  it 
out  for  the  supplies  that  make  the  crop,  she  will  remain  poor  "  (pp. 
219-220).  In  this  thinking,  however,  the  News  and  Courier  pre- 
ceded the  Constitution  by  ten  years. 


22  i]  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  I  15 

manufacturing  interests  and  would  keep  abreast  of  the  rapid 
improvement  in  the  material  affairs  of  the  South."113 

The  Manufacturers'  Record  caught  a  spirit  which  had  its 
birth  in  the  heart  of  the  South;  as  its  own  words  show,  it 
was  to  "  represent "  and  "  keep  abreast  of  "  industrial  de- 
velopment in  the  South  rather  than  originate  this  in  the 
first  instance.  In  its  best  years  it  was  a  useful  popularizer 
of  Southern  opportunities.114 

A  fundamental  cause  of  the  building  of  cotton  mills  in 
the  South,  really  self-evident,  was  an  awakening  to  the  ad- 
vantage of  adding  the  profits  of  manufacture  to  those  of 
production  of  raw  material.115  Dawson  in  1880  put  the 
matter  in  simple  terms : 

The  point  on  which  we  lay  the  most  stress  is  that,  to  the  extent  in 
which  cotton  .  .  .  produced  in  South  Carolina  is  manufactured  in 
the  State,  the  whole  of  the  profit  upon  that  cotton,  from  the  first 
stage  to  the  last,  remains  in  some  form  within  the  State  for  the 
benefit  of  its  people.    Where  the  cotton  is  produced  here  and  manu- 

113  Cf.  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Rec- 
ord, Nov.  18,  23,  1882. 

114  Cf.  Hemphill,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  p.  539. 

115  This  primary  consideration  had  been  explained  to  an  earlier 
unheeding  generation.  Gregg  said  that  coarse  goods  mills  in  Massa- 
chusetts presented  "  a  fact  that  cannot  but  strike  a  cotton  planter 
with  great  force,  viz :  that  174  hands  in  12  months,  convert  4,329 
bales  of  cotton  .  .  .  into  cloth  .  .  .  thus  adding  over  $40  to  the  value 
of  each  bale"  (Domestic  Industry,  p.  27  ff.).  "Have  we  not  the 
raw  material  on  the  spot,  thus  saving  the  freight  of  a  double 
transportation?"  (cf.  ibid.,  pp.  21,  24-25).  It  was  shown  a  little 
later  that  Tennessee  cotton  planters  made  only  uj4  per  cent 
profit,  while  manufacturers  of  the  same  crop  made  24  per  cent,  and 
it  was  asked :  "  Are  there  any  so  blind  as  not  to  see  the  advantages 
of  the  system?"  (DeBow,  vol.  i,  p.  126).  A  writer  in  1866  quoted 
an  advocate  of  the  "  cotton-field  system  "  of  manufacture  of  seven- 
teen years  before,  who  declared  that  "  the  spindles  and  looms  must 
be  brought  to  the  cotton  fields.  This  is  the  true  location  of  this 
powerful  assistant  to  the  grower,"  and  that  to  bring  mills  to  cotton 
"  is  but  one  move,  whilst  sending  the  cotton  to  the  mills  is  a  heavy 
annual,  perpetual  tax,"  and  proceeded  to  estimate  how  this  could  be 
cheaply  accomplished  (Barbee,  The  Cotton  Question,  p.  138  ff.). 
In  1878  total  costs  of  manufacture  in  Lowell,  Mass.,  and  Augusta, 
Ga.,  were  shown,  leading  to  the  conclusion  that  in  freight,  commis- 
sions, insurance  and  exchange  the  Augusta  manufacturer  saved  $6.62 
per  bale  over  his  New  England  competitor  on  goods  shipped  to  New 
York,  and  $10.23  on  those  sent  direct  to  the  West.  For  Montgomery 
to  double  the  value  of  its  cotton  in  this  way  "  is  our  right,  and  our 
duty  .  .  ."  (Berney,  Handbook  of  Alabama,  p.  271). 


Il6  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN   THE    SOUTH        [222 

factured  elsewhere  South  Carolina  is  in  the  position  of  furnishing 
the  elements  which  make  other  communities  rich;  ...  we  know  that 
the  wealth  of  New  England  is  due  to  the  profit  made  upon  the  manu- 
facture of  the  raw  material  which  the  South  supplies,  and  which  the 
South  .  .  .  buys  back  from  New  England  at  a  high  price  in  its  manu- 
factured state.116 

A  Southerner  speaking  at  the  Atlanta  Exposition  asked 
"by  what  rule  of  political  economy  should  the  Southern 
people  send  their  cotton  at  an  expense  always  deducted 
from  its  price,  to  distant  sections  and  foreign  countries  to 
the  spun  and  woven  .  .  .  ,"  and  told  his  listeners  that 
"  Here  the  cotton  grows  up  to  the  doorsteps  of  your  mills, 
and  supply  and  demand  clasp  hands.  .  .  ."117 

116  Leading  article,  in  Blackman.  Besides  many  collateral  benefits, 
the  eighteen  mills  of  the  State  converted  cotton  worth  $1,631,820 
into  manufactured  goods  worth  $3,932,150.  An  editorial  headed 
"  The  Gold  in  Cotton,"  said :  "  At  present  Charleston  does  nothing 
to  increase  the  value  of  the  cotton  which  comes  here  for  sale.  It 
leaves  us  as  it  finds  us.  The  city  lives  on  the  pickings  and  scrapings. 
.  .  .  Cotton  mills  change  all  this.  A  bale  of  raw  cotton,  worth 
forty  dollars,  is  spun  into  yarns  or  cloth  worth  eighty  dollars.  There 
is  the  usual  profit  in  buying  and  selling  the  cotton,  and,  in  addition 
to  this,  Charleston  gets  forty  dollars  a  bale,  which  goes  into  our 
purses  and  comes  out  of  the  pockets  of  the  persons  who  consume 
the  goods"  (News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb.  2,  1881). 

117  Ibid.,  Oct.  10,  1881.  "...  every  Southern  man  is  sure  to 
prove  to  you  that  it  is  a  dead  waste  to  ship  raw  cotton  to  a  mill 
1,500  miles  away  when  it  could  be  made  into  yarns  and  fabrics  much 
cheaper  in  factories  distant  from  the  cotton  field  only  a  short  half- 
day's  journey  for  a  mule"  (Atlanta  correspondence  of  New  York 
Times,  quoted  in  ibid.,  Nov.  5,  1881).  Cf.  Richmond  Dispatch, 
quoted  in  ibid.,  March  25,  1881.  "  We  have  the  raw  material — New 
England  takes  it  and  augments  its  value  by  her  labor  .  .  .  we,  too, 
must  endeavor  to  mix  skill  and  labor  with  our  raw  material  before 
letting  it  pass  from  our  hands  .  .  ."  (Observer,  Raleigh,  March  2, 
1880).  Cf.  ibid.,  June  6,  1880;  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  April 
25,  1881.  "Freights  were  high  then;  it  was  a  great  argument  that 
we  saved  by  manufacturing  the  cotton  here  and  shipping  the  goods 
to  the  North  for  just  what  it  cost  to  send  the  cotton  there  "  (Charles 
Estes,  int.,  Augusta).  Hammett  told  a  meeting  of  the  South  Caro- 
lina Agricultural  and  Mechanical  Society :  "  The  South  is  fitted  for 
the  cotton  manufacture,  which  adds  profits  and  value  of  labor  to 
value  of  raw  material,"  showed  that  the  South  had  an  advantage  of 
10  to  20  per  cent  over  New  England  in  the  business,  and  counted  the 
benefit  to  Southern  communities  through  establishment  of  mills 
(News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Aug.  1,  1881).  "There  is  no  rea- 
son why  the  South  should  lose  the  entire  profit  upon  manufacturing 
cotton  and  be  content  to  gain  only  the  beggarly  profit  of  producing 
it,  while  England  and  the  North  grow  rich  upon  handling  it  .  .  ." 
(Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Sept. 


223]  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  117 

No  one  did  more  to  impress  this  idea  upon  the  South 
than  Tompkins ;  he  presented  it  in  primer-like  plainness  and 
from  every  angle.  It  is  difficult  to  realize  how  far  this 
was  from  a  truism  to  the  South  even  by  the  time  he  wrote 
and  spoke.118 

The  question  whether  the  South  should  manufacture  cot- 
ton or  be  content  with  cultivation  of  the  raw  material  was 
made  vivid  by  the  opposition  to  Southern  mills  on  the  part 
of  Edward  Atkinson,  of  Boston.  It  may  almost  be  said  that 
he  conducted  a  propaganda  to  show  that  the  South  should 
devote  itself  to  raising,  ginning  and  preparing  the  staple  to 
be  spun  and  woven  elsewhere.  A  talented  organizer  of 
business,  a  not  unkindly  egotist,  officious  without  being 
patronizing,  gifted  in  social  imagination,  and  one  of  the 
first  New  Englanders  to  concern  himself  actively  in  a  public 
way  with  Southern  economic  affairs  after  Reconstruction, 
Atkinson  sought,  sometimes  with  semi-private  purpose,  to 
mirror  the  South  to  itself.  The  image  he  furnished,  by  its 
very  distortion,  assisted  Southerners  to  a  clearer  view  of 
their  task.  At  that  peculiar  juncture  in  the  South  he  was 
listened  to  attentively,  and  negatively  and  positively  exerted 
a  striking  influence.119 

2,  1882).     Cf.  ibid,  for  quotation  of  an  expressive  illustration  of  this 
thought;  a  labored  explanation  is  given  in  ibid.,  June  3,  1882. 

118  An  ordinary  county  producing  10,000  bales  would  get,  at  6 
cents  a  pound,  $300,000  for  its  cotton;  if  sold  as  cloth  at  18  cents, 
this  cotton  would  bring  $900,000.  "  Assume  that  this  cloth  was 
shipped  to  China  instead  of  shipping  the  raw  cotton  to  England 
and  it  becomes  evident  that  the  English  cotton  buyer  sends  here' 
$300,000  while  the  Chinaman  would  send  $900,000,"  and  he  showed 
how  this  $600,000  increment  would  be  distributed ;  that,  also,  fac- 
tories would  bring  other  benefits  by  increasing  the  value  of  raw 
cotton  and  of  farms,  creating  a  market  for  perishable  produce  and 
affording  diversity  of  employment  to  members  of  the  community 
(Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  p.  16  ff.).  Cf.  Observer, 
Raleigh,  May  19,  1880,  in  comment  upon  Winston  and  Durham. 
Cf.  Tompkins,  ibid.,  pp.  23-24,  177-178;  History  of  Mecklenburg, 
vol.  i,  p.  24.  Tompkins'  ingenious  little  book,  "  Cotton  Values  in 
Textile  Fabrics,"  is  an  object  lesson  on  this  point. 

119  See  Who's  Who  in  America,  1906-1907,  p.  54.  The  range  of 
his  writings,  from  the  science  of  nutrition  to  the  cost  of  war,  indi- 
cates his  ready  versatility.  He  was  frequently  disingenuous,  under- 
standing more  than  he  expressed,  but  his  blunt  force  compelled 
notice. 


Il8  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [224 

He  enters  this  story  when,  at  the  invitation  of  leading 
men  of  city  and  State,  he  delivered  an  address  in  the  senate 
chamber  of  the  capitol  in  Atlanta  in  October,  1880,  espe- 
cially to  explain  his  proposal  for  the  holding  of  a  cotton  ex- 
position.120 Shortly  before  he  had  expressed  himself  as 
unable  to  recommend  to  the  North  investments  in  Southern 
cotton  mills,  but  entered  into  no  details.  This  had  roused 
a  storm  of  protest  and  discussion.121  The  incident  showed, 
with  many  others,  that  Atkinson  interested  himself  in  the 
South  a  little  too  late  to  suit  his  purpose;  the  people  had 
already  formed  a  desire  for  cotton  mills  that  was  not  easily 
dispelled.  In  the  speech  he  had  to  advert  to  this,  and  in  its 
printed  form  more  references  were  included.  He  was  frank 
to  say,  however,  that  if  he  were  wrong,  the  proposed  exhi- 
bition could  have  no  more  urgent  reason  than  to  demon- 
strate him  mistaken. 

In  judging  his  statements  it  must  be  remembered  that  as 
head  of  factory  mutual  fire  insurance  companies,  he  was 
constructively  representing  New  England  cotton  manufac- 
turers. He  said  at  Atlanta :  "  The  true  diversity  of  employ- 
ment which  makes  self-sustaining  communities  consists  of 
occupations  that  do  not  appeal  to  the  imagination  like  the 
great  cotton  factory;  but  the  artisans  .  .  .  who  work  in 
iron  or  wood,  the  stove-maker  and  the  like,  the  furniture- 
maker  and  the  tinman,  the  house-wright,  the  wagon-builder, 
the  blacksmith,  and  the  whitesmith  are  the  most  valuable 
citizens.  The  hundred  arts  that  require  but  little  capital 
and  support  many  men  are  the  ones  that,  next  to  the  farmer, 
form  the  bone  and  sinew  of  society.  When  these  are  es- 
tablished, the  textile  factory  may  well  follow,  but  ought  not 
to  precede  in  any  large  degree."122  Rather  than  cotton 
mills,  the  South  should  put  up  shops  to  make  implements, 
and  the  manufacture  of  clothing  would  give  work  to  women 
in  their  own  homes.    "  On  the  other  hand,  the  most  impor- 

120  Cf.  Address  at  Atlanta,  preface,  p.  3. 

121  Ibid.,  p.  27,  and  preface,  p.  4. 

122  Ibid.,  p.  28.  If  factories  there  must  be,  then  shoe  factories 
required  only  one-third  as  much  capital  per  operative  as  cotton 
mills. 


225]]  THE    RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  I  19 

tant  branch  of  the  cotton  manufacture — that  of  ginning, 
packing,  and  pressing  cotton  for  the  use  of  the  factory — 
must  continue  to  be  done  in  the  South,  and  every  million 
dollars  spent  in  the  right  manner  in  this  department  will 
...  do  more  to  build  up  the  cotton  States  than  any  million 
expended  in  cotton  factories.  It  is  in  order  that  these  op- 
portunities for  immediate  profit  may  be  made  apparent  that 
the  cotton  exhibition  should  be  held."123  The  cotton  crop, 
he  declared,  was  depreciated1  10  per  cent  by  careless  han- 
dling in  preparation  for  shipment  to  the  spinner  at  the 
North  or  abroad.  The  cotton  manufacture  is  a  unit,  be- 
ginning in  the  field  and  ending  in  the  cloth  room  of  the  fac- 
tory, and  "  if  the  South  desires  to  enter  upon  the  safest, 
surest,  and  most  profitable  branch  of  cotton  manufactur- 
ing" it  should  confine  itself  to  the  initial  processes.12* 

He  said  that  Southern  spindles  could  not  keep  pace  with 
Southern  demand,  and  so  Northern  manufacturers  did  not 
fear  Southern  competition ;  he  did  not  see  that  this  demand 
constituted  an  encouragement  to  establishment  of  Southern 
mills.  He  tried  to  scare  the  South  by  enlarging  on  the 
supremacy  of  the  New  England  manufacture  and  contem- 
plated extensions  that  were  imminent.125 

123  Ibid.,  preface,  p.  5  ff.  Interdependence  was  the  foundation  of 
union  between  the  sections.  "  The  railroad  has  almost  eliminated 
distance ;  and  each  section  that  serves  the  other  best,  serves  itself 
also"  (ibid.,  p.  8). 

124  Ibid.,  appendix,  p.  34  ff. 

125  Ibid.,  preface,  p.  7  ff.  He  naively  said  it  would  be  greatly  to 
the  advantage  of  New  England  manufactures  "  to  have  a  solid  body 
of  men  in  the  South  interested  like  themselves  in  promoting  better 
ginning,  baling,  and  handling  cotton  as  it  comes  from  the  field " 
(ibid.).  He  made  suggestive  allusions  to  possible  unsuitableness  of 
Southern  climate  for  cotton  spinning  (ibid.,  p.  4ff.).  One  would 
like  to  attribute  to  Atkinson  nothing  less  than  a  national  viewpoint 
in  advocating  Atlanta  as  the  place  for  the  exposition  because  it  was 
in  the  cotton  country  where  the  preparation  of  the  staple  could  best 
be  urged;  manufacturing  machinery  needed  no  encouragement  (ibid., 
pp.  Q-10).  He  tried  to  interest  the  South  in  the  use  of  ensilage 
(ibid.,  p.  28),  was  working  on  employment  of  then  wasted  by- 
products of  the  cotton  plant  (Bradstreet's,  quoted  in  Baltimore 
Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  June  3,  1882), 
carried  attention  to  the  soya  bean  (Southern  Cotton  Spinners'  Assn., 
proceed.  7th  Annual  Convention,  p.  102),  said  there  would  not  be 
sufficient  labor  for  cotton  mills,  and  that  people  would  prefer  out- 


120  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [^226 

When  Edward  Atkinson  and  a  committee  from  the  New 
England  Cotton  Manufacturers'  Association  visited  the 
Atlanta  Exposition  the  next  year,  an  official  statement  of 
their  impressions  showed  that  they  appreciated  most  those 
exhibits  having  to  do  with  "ginning  and  preparing"  the 
cotton,  and  declared  the  identity  of  interest  between  cotton 
grower  and  manufacturer  were  here  demonstrated.126  In 
an  interview  with  press  representatives  he  led  away  from 
manufacturing,  and  sought  to  arouse  enthusiasm  over  the 
roller  as  opposed  to  the  saw  gin.127  In  a  set  address  in  the 
exposition  building  he  reiterated  these  points,  feared  the 
real  reason  why  cotton  manufactures  would  not  succeed  in 
the  South  was  that  most  enterprisers  did  not  know  how  to 
work  on  a  close  margin,  did  not  "know  the  difference  be- 
tween a  cent  and  a  nickel."128  He  urged  rather  the  build- 
ing of  railroads,  the  opening  of  schools  and  savings  banks, 
development  of  dairying,  and  even  the  importation  of  Pon- 
gee, Tussah  or  Cheefoo  silk  worms.129 

But  the  purpose  of  the  South  had  solidified  too  much  to 
be  dissolved  by  such  discouragement  or  neglect,  and,  as  will 
presently  be  seen,  an  exhibit  which  was  planned  by  Mr. 
Atkinson  to  be  primarily  agricultural,  gave  tremendous  im- 
petus to  the  manufacturing  of  cotton.     Commenting  on  his 

door  employment  anyway  (Address  at  Atlanta,  preface,  p.  5  ff.), 
and  that  even  coarse  yarn  mills  involved  risks  the  South  could  not 
take  (ibid.,  pp.  27-28).  He  asserted  that  the  approaching  exposition 
"  should  be  rather  with  a  view  to  the  development  of  tools  and  im- 
plements for  the  cultivation  and  for  conversion  of  the  plant  into  its' 
primary  forms  of  fibre,  seed,  oil,  oil-cake,  paper  stock,  and  wool, 
than  with  a  view  to  the  manufacture  of  cotton  fabrics"  (ibid.,  p. 
22).  Cf.  Southern  Cotton  Spinner's  Assn.,  proceed.  7th  Annual 
Convention,  p.  85  ff.  The  seal  of  the  exposition  bore  a  cotton  boll 
but  no  spindle. 

126  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Nov.  1,  1881.  The  advantage 
of  sending  cotton  north  in  the  raw  state  was  implied  in  frequent 
assertions  of  Atkinson  (cf.  Address  at  Second  Annual  Fair  of  New 
England  Manufacturers'  and  Mechanics'  Institute,  Boston,  1882,  pp. 
2,  27-28). 

127  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Nov.  8,  1881.  Cf.  Tompkins, 
Storing  and  Manufacturing  of  Cotton,  p.  14. 

128  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Dec.  5,  1881.  Cf.  the  writer's 
"  Factors  in  Future  of  Cotton  Manufacture  in  South,"  in  Manufac- 
turers' Record,  Baltimore,  May  10,  1917. 

129  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Dec.  5,  1881. 


2273  THE  RISE  0F  THE   MILLS  I21 

exposition  speech,  an  editor  said :  "  Mr.  Atkinson  is  mis- 
leading only  when  invincible  prejudice  keeps  him  from  see- 
ing clearly,  and  even  Northern  newspapers  admit  that  he  is 
wrong  in  his  belief  that  cotton  manufacturing,  on  a  large 
scale,  will  not  pay  in  the  South."130  H.  P.  Hammett  had 
Observed  a  few  months  earlier :  "  It  is  said  the  South  should 
plant  and  prepare  the  cotton  for  market,  and  increase  its 
value  by  improved  cleaning  and  ginning  appliances  (which 
in  themselves  are  proper  and  commendable),  and  then  send 
it  to  the  North  to  be  manufactured  there,  to  be  returned  to 
us  in  goods.  ...  I  do  not  impute  any  .  .  .  selfish  motives 
to  the  parties  who  have  thus  .  .  .  given  their  advice,  but 
...  I  am  of  opinion  that  good  earned  dividends  by  South- 
ern mills  are  much  more  convincing  arguments  to  stock- 
holders than  fine  spun  theories.  .  .  ."131 

130  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Dec.  5,  1881. 

131  Ibid.,  Aug.  1, 1881.  It  is  said  that  in  connection  with  the  found- 
ing of  Hamraett's  Piedmont  Factory,  Atkinson  wrote  a  notice  show- 
ing how  cotton  manufacturing  in  the  South  could  never  pay.  This 
came  under  the  eye  of  Hammett,  who  pinned  to  the  clipping  his 
annual  balance  sheet,  showing  a  profit  of  20  per  cent,  and  sent  them 
to  Atkinson  (W.  J.  Thackston,  int.,  Greenville).  Atkinson  never 
did  really  give  up  his  campaign.  In  the  section  on  cotton  manufac- 
tures of  the  United  States  census  of  manufactures  of  1880,  written 
by  him,  and  transmitted  not  until  1883,  he  devoted  6  of  the  16  pages 
to  the  preparation  of  the  staple,  inveighed  against  bad  ginning  and 
urged  upon  the  South  opportunities  for  improvement.  Twenty  years 
later  he  was  still  on  the  subject  of  ginning  in  talking  to  the  Southern 
Cotton  Spinners'  convention,  but  the  revival  of  one  of  his  Atlanta 
ideas  (Address,  pp.  18-25),  namely,  the  folding  of  sheep  upon  worn- 
out  cotton  uplands,  met  now  with  the  retort :  "  Let  Massachusetts 
successfully  grow  our  '  fleecy  staple '  in  her  New  England  meadows 
before  she  advises  us  to  raise  Northern  sheep  in  a  Southern  cotton 
patch"  (proceed.  7th  Annual  Convention,  remarks  of  B.  W.  Hunt). 
Some  Southern  manufacturers  remember  well  Atkinson's  position. 
"Edward  Atkinson?"  rejoined  one  of  these,  "He  was  the  man  that 
didn't  believe  in  Southern  cotton  mills.  He  was  one  of  the  most 
prominent  authorities  on  cotton  in  his  day.  He  made  himself  very 
obnoxious  to  our  folks  by  the  way  he  opposed  cotton  manufacturing 
in  the  South.  He  just  took  the  wrong  turn  on  it"  (W.  R.  Odell, 
int.,  Concord).  And  another,  who  had  heard  the  Bostonian  in  At- 
lanta :  "  Edward  Atkinson  tried  to  have  an  influence  in  deterring 
Southerners  from  founding  cotton  mills,  but  we  had  our  own  ideas. 
When  he  talked  to  a  reporter  here  against  Southern  mills,  I  replied 
to  him_  in  the  paper"  (Charles  Estes,  int.,  Augusta).  The  very 
exposition  building,  which  Atkinson  suggested  might  be  taken  away 
in  sections  to  be  used  for  ginneries  or  oil  mills,  was  used  on  the 


122  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        ^228 

The  International  Cotton  Exposition,  held  in  Atlanta  in 
the  closing  months  of  1881,  occupies  a  significant  place  in 
the  history  of  Southern  cotton  mills.  It  accomplished  two 
things :  first,  it  drew  together  the  South's  apostles  of  a  new 
industrial  order  into  confirmatory  exchange  of  views  and 
plans,  and  afforded  concrete,  tangible  encouragement  to  al- 
ready forming  aspirations;  second,  it  opened  the  eyes  of  the 
North  to  the  field  of  investment  that  lay  in  the  South, 
breaking  down  intersectional  economic  and  political  bar- 
riers of  prejudice.  From  commencement  of  practical  or- 
ganization of  the  exposition  in  December,  1880,  it  was  ap- 
parent, in  prospectus  and  executive  personnel,  that  it  was 
to  be  a  more  comprehensive  undertaking  than  Edward  At- 
kinson had  suggested.  Having  origin  in  his  mind,  it  ex- 
panded and  developed  in  the  hands  of  others.  New  England 
cotton  manufacturing  machinery  makers  and  mill  engineers 
were  included  with  Southern  industrialists  and  publicists 
in  choice  of  officials.  Not  only  raising  and  preparing  of 
raw  cotton,  but  production  of  cotton  goods,  was  to  receive 
emphasis.  The  secretary  said :  "  Machinery  of  all  the 
classes  demanded  in  cultivation  .  .  .  and  ...  in  ginning, 
baling,  packing,  and  compressing  raw  cotton,  belongs  to  the 
first  division  of  machinery  exhibits.  The  machinery  requi- 
site for  manufacture  of  cotton,  with  the  best  form  of  mills, 
the  most  economical  applications  of  power,  and  all  the 
details  of  subsequent  manufacture,  constitute  a  great  de- 
partment in  which  there  is  a  world  of  interest."  The  ex- 
position would  demonstrate  generally  that  the  South  had  a 
great  future  before  it,  and  that,  with  assistance,  it  would 
become  "  prosperous  in  its  own  right  through  a  liberal  de- 
velopment of  its  own  resources."132 

spot  as  a  cotton  factory.  On  the  gratuitous  advice  offered  to  the 
South  "  by  those  interested  in  preventing  manufacturing  develop- 
ment," of  which  Atkinson's  must  serve  here  as  typical,  cf .  Thompson, 
pp.  62-63. 

132  John  W.  Ryckman,  in  author's  preface  of  Atkinson's  Address 
at  Atlanta,  p.  4.  Another  connected  with  the  exposition  gave  as 
part  of  its  purpose :  "  To  exhibit  to  the  Southern  people  and  to  visi- 
tors from  America  and  Europe  the  different  processes  in  the  manu- 
facture of  cotton  from  the  boll  to  the  complete  fabric,  and  by  the 


229] 


THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  12$ 


That  South  and  North  were  both  ripe  for  the  undertak- 
ing is  shown  by  the  rapidity  with  which  it  was  accomplished. 
The  exposition  was  opened  in  less  than  a  year  after  first 
mention  of  it,  in  less  than  six  months  after  real  steps  began 
to  be  made  toward  it,  and  in  just  108  days  after  actual  work 
of  erection  was  begun.133 

The  Atlanta  Exposition  was  not  the  inception  of  the  in- 
dustrial idea  in  the  South,  but  rather  its  manifestation.  It 
augmented  rather  than  initiated  a  purpose.  Had  the  South 
not  known  its  own  mind  already,  Atkinson's  attitude  might 
easily  have  narrowed  the  exhibits  and  diminished  their  use- 
fulness.134. 

The  timeliness  of  the  exposition  being  apparent  all  along, 
its  influence  in  stimulating  cotton  manufacturing  and  all 

friction  of  competition  ascertain  the  best  methods  and  find  the  best 
machinery.  .  .  .  We  people  of  the  South  should  embrace  every 
opportunity  which  .  .  .  will  bring  among  us  intelligent  and  inter- 
ested observers  of  our  industrial  condition,  resources  and  aptitudes. 
We  have  in  the  midst  of  us  the  raw  material  ...  of  a  magnificent 
prosperity.  We  lack  knowledge,  population  and  capital.  These  may 
be  slowly  accumulated  in  the  course  of  years,  or  they  may  be  rap- 
idly by  well  directed  efforts  to  obtain  them  from  beyond  our  own 
borders.  We  advocate  the  latter  plan"  (News  and  Courier,  Charles- 
ton, March  14,  1881). 

133  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Dec.  5,  1881.  An  Atlanta  cotton 
manufacturer  headed  the  executive  committee,  a  Vermont  engineer 
was  made  chief  of  machinery,  and  agents  made  tours  of  investiga- 
tion through  the  North  and  Europe.  Subscriptions  came  simulta- 
neously from  North  and  South ;  General  Sherman  started  Northern 
subscriptions  with  $2000  (ibid.,  March  8,  May  3,  1881).  On  the 
opening  day,  Daniel  W.  Voorhees,  of  Indiana,  spoke  against  free 
trade  (ibid.,  Oct.  6,  1881). 

134  A  correspondent  in  a  new  mill  community  wrote :  "  It  is  to  be 
hoped  the  Atlanta  Exposition  will  not  take  all  the  enthusiasm  out 
of  .our  capitalists  and  enterprising  men,  but  that  it  will  only  tend  to 
a  greater  and  more  speedy  development  of  our  resources  "  (ibid., 
Oct.  21,  1881).  "A  good  work  has  been  done,  the  benefits  of  which 
will  be  felt  in  every  part  of  the  country.  The  New  South  takes  a 
fresh  start  at  the  Atlanta  Exposition"  (ibid.,  Oct.  7,  1881).  The 
secretary  declared  the  exposition  was  pushed  through  hurriedly  be- 
cause_  "  a  knowledge  of  the  South's  resources  was  demanded  .  .  ." 
(Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  June 
24,  1882).  Cf.  ibid.,  Oct.  7,  1882.  "The  Atlanta  Exposition  .  .  . 
was  the  hopeful  and  conscious  expression  of  the  opening  of  a  new 
era  for  Southern  industry  .  .  ."  (see  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of 
Nation,  vol.  vi,  pp.  280-281).  Visitors  to  the  exposition  "were  con- 
vinced that  'an  industrial  revolution  had  actually  been  effected  in 
the  South  .  .  .'"  (see  Hammond,  pp.  328-329).  Cf.  Copeland,  pp. 
32-33 ;  Goldsmith,  pp.  4-5. 


124  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [23O 

industrial  development  was  quickly  evidenced.135  The  new 
statesmen  of  the  South,  industrially  and  not  politically 
minded,  found  voice.136  Hint9  and  hopes  became  certain- 
ties. "When  the  Atlanta  Exposition  closed  ...  it  began 
to  be  realized  that  the  South  was  awakened  to  a  new  life^ 
.  .  .  Intelligence  was  to  take  the  place  of  ignorance  in 
methods  of  cultivation;  machinery  was  to  take  the  place  of 
hand  labor ;  manufacturing  was  to  take  the  place  of  export- 
ing raw  material  and  bringing  back  the  manufactured  ar- 
ticle. .  .  .  Capital  began  to  see  the  rich  rewards  waiting  to 
be  won,  and  prepared  to  occupy  the  vantage  ground."137 

Many  of  the  exhibits  were  sold  during  the  exposition, 
and  orders  taken  to  the  amount  of  $2,ooo,ooo.138     When 

135  A  manufacturer  remembers  that  operatives  from  his  mill  who 
visited  the  exposition  brought  back  small-pox,  four  hundred  cases 
resulting.  But  Atlanta  spread  other  and  more  salutary  infection  as 
well.  Another's  dominant  recollection  is  that  "  they  had  a  great 
deal  of  eastern  machinery  there,  with  men  sent  along  to  operate 
it"  (Charles  Estes,  int.,  Augusta). 

136  Cf.  letter  of  A.  J.  Russell  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce 
and  Manufacturers'  Record,  July  15,  1882. 

137  "  vv.  B.  C,"  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufac- 
turers' Record,  Oct.  7,  1882.  David  R.  Francis  ("The  Influence  of 
Agricultural  and  Industrial  Fairs  and  Expositions  on  the  Economic 
Development  of  the  South  since  1865,"  in  South  in  Building  of  Na- 
tion, vol.  vi,  p.  568  ff.),  does  not  mention  the  Atlanta  Exposition  of 
1881,  and  apparently  is  unacquainted  with  its  meaning.  He  attributes 
to  the  New  Orleans  Exposition  of  1884-1885  a  significance  that  be- 
longs to  the  earlier  effort.  "  Not  all  the  books  and  papers  and 
speeches  that  man  can  produce  would  do  the  South  as  much  good  in 
half  a  century  as  the  single  event  of  the  Atlanta  Exposition  did  last 
year.  .  .  .  The  cotton  spindles  of  the  south  will  increase  year  by 
year  until  the  river  cities  will  resound  with  the  music  .  .  .  and  the 
old  battle-fields  are  the  scenes  of  a  great  industrial  revival"  (Boston 
Economist,  quoted  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufac- 
turers' Record,  Sept.  30,  1882).  The  whole  lesson  of  the  exposition 
was  expressed  when  "  the  governor  of  Georgia  appeared  on  the 
grounds  dressed  in  a  comfortable  suit  of  cottonade  manufactured  on 
the  premises  from  cotton  picked  from  the  bolls  the  same  day  in 
sight  of  the  spectators."  Cf.  Goldsmith,  pp.  4-5,  on  this  episode 
and  the  influence  of  the  exposition  generally;  U.  S.  Census  of  Manu- 
factures, 1890,  "  Cotton  Manufactures,"  by  Edward  Stanwood,  pp. 
28-29. 

138  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
Sept.  23,  1882.  In  Atlanta  itself  in  the  year  following  the  exposition 
two  cotton  mills  began  operations,  one  in  the  exposition  building 
itself ;  plow  works  were  greatly  enlarged ;  a  cotton  seed  cleaner  com- 
pany increased  output;  bridge  builders  extended  their  business;  a 
cotton  compress  was  erected;  a  company  to  manufacture  a  cotton 


23  I J  THE   RISE    OF   THE    MILLS  125 

the  Atlanta  Exposition  closed,  some  of  its  exhibits  were 
moved  to  Charleston  and  formed  the  nucleus  of  an  indus- 
trial display  there.139  Other  fairs  were  projected  more 
widely  than  achieved,  but  the  North  Carolina  industrial 
exhibit,  at  Raleigh,  in  1884,  carried  on  the  Atlanta  spirit 
and  made  it  local  to  the  State  in  a  way  that  assisted  cotton 
mill  growth.  Northern  machinery  manufactures  sent 
equipment  that  was  manned  by  North  Carolina  opera- 
tives.140 An  exposition  unsuccessfully  urged  for  Balti- 
more, to  have  been  held  the  same  year,  borrowed  incentive 
from  benefits  derived  by  the  city  of  Atlanta;  there  was  the 
idea  of  capturing  leadership  of  an  advance  which  had  been 
born  to  the  South  in  a  more  generous  impulse.141  William 
Gregg  in  1845  had  instanced  for  Charleston  the  appropriate 
lesson  of  the  way  in  which  leading  propertyholders  of  New- 
buryport,  Massachusetts,  when  the  shipping  of  the  place 
deserted  in  favor  of  Boston  and  the  town  was  going  to 
ruin,  determined  to  make  an  effort  to  resuscitate  its  pros- 
perity by  establishing  cotton  manufactures  with  steam 
power.  "  It  acted  like  a  charm.  The  three  or  four  estab- 
lishments put  in  operation,  have  all  done  well  and  produced 
a  new  state  of  things."  So  it  might  be,  he  showed,  not 
only   with   Charleston,   but   with   Augusta,    Columbia   and 

planter  commenced  building;  a  cotton  seed  oil  mill  was  erected  and 
other  enterprises  went  forward  (ibid.,  Sept.  30,  1882).  "In  six 
months  after  the  exhibition  closed,  $2,000,000  had  been  invested  in 
manufacturing  enterprises  in  that  city  of  only  40,000  inhabitants,  all 
of  which  was  directly  traceable  to  the  exhibition  "  (ibid.,  Oct.  21, 
1882).     Cf.  ibid.,  June  24,  1882. 

139  Cf.  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  1,  and  for  month  of 
February,  1882. 

140  W.  R.  Odell,  int.,  Concord. 

141 "  The  rapid  development  of  the  South  in  all  her  material  in- 
terests has  been  the  wonder  of  the  age,  and  yet  the  past  is  but  the 
harbinger  of  the  future.  Baltimore  now  has  the  opportunity  of 
placing  herself  at  the  head  of  this  grand  Southern  movement,  and 
thus  so  closely  allying  herself  with  the  South  as  to  be  ever  after- 
wards the  recognized  centre  of  the  commercial  and  manufacturing 
affairs  of  that  section.  Will  she  do  it?  The  answer  must  come 
from  our  business  community  and  upon  it  will  depend  the  future  of 
Baltimore "  (Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers' 
Record,  Sept.  23,  1882).  Cf.  ibid.,  June  10,  17,  July  1,  22,  Oct. 
1,  14,  Nov.  11,  1882;  Feb.  1,  1883. 


126  THE    RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [[232 

other  points  at  the  South.142  More  than  any  other  man  of 
his  time,  he  understood  the  public  benefits  resulting  from 
industry,  especially  cotton  manufactures,  and  held  these  to 
constitute  a  prime  reason  for  building  mills.143  An  advo- 
cate of  rural  cooperative  credit  associations  in  the  South, 
believed  that  prosperous  men,  though  not  themselves  need- 
ing aid,  would  take  hold  of  the  scheme  from  "philanthropic 
motives  which  always  animate  the  minds  of  a  large  propor- 
tion of  the  well-to-do  citizens  of  any  country,  stimulating 
them  to  efforts  in  behalf  of  the  community  in  which  they 
live."144    And  one  who  knew  the  South  said  of  Southerners 

142  Domestic  Industry,  p.  30.  He  lamented  that  Charleston's  large 
surplus  of  dormant  wealth  was  not  directed  to  internal  improve- 
ments in  South  Carolina  instead  of  seeking  Wall  Street  (Speech  on 
Blue  Ridge  Railroad,  pp.  6-7,  29),  and  urged  that  limited  liability- 
be  granted  to  industrial  corporations  which  might  thus  lay  small 
investors  under  tribute  for  the  building  up  of  the  State  (Propriety 
of  Granting  Charters  of  Incorporation,  pp.  4-11). 

143  An  earlier  manifestation  has  been  alluded  to.  "  About  1833, 
following  the  agitation  against  the  tariff,  several  companies  for 
manufacturing  cotton  were  organized  from  patriotic  and  political 
rather  than  from  purely  commercial  motives"  (see  Clark,  in  South 
in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  pp.  321-322). 

144  Hammond,  pp.  203-204.  "  Probably  no  better  field  for  the 
exercise  of  such  motives  could  be  found  than  among  the  large 
planters  of  the  South.  Long  accustomed  to  leadership  in  all  the 
political,  business  and  social  affairs  of  the  community,  imbued  with 
a  spirit  of  helpfulness  which  their  control  over  the  .  .  .  earthly 
destiny  of  others  taught  them  to  exercise  during  slavery  days,  taught 
finally  by  their  own  discouragements  during  the  years  of  reconstruc- 
tion how  bitter  is  the  curse  of  poverty,  these  men  would  not  lack 
.  .  .  the  willingness  to  help  their  poorer  neighbors  along  the  road 
to  .  .  .  industrial  independence."  Murphy  wrote  that  the  Old  South 
in  the  New  South  "chiefly  .  .  .  has  maintained  .  .  .  the  old  sense 
of  responsibility  toward  the  unprivileged,"  and  that  it  is  this  "  quick 
sense  of  social  obligation,"  this  "  local  conscience,"  which  has  given 
"  distinction  and  beauty  to  the  allegiance  between  the  aristocracy 
and  the  common  people"  (p.  16  ff.).  "Cooperation  ...  is  the  very 
spirit  of  democracy — concern  for  the  common  good,  not  only  feeling 
that  I  am  my  brother's  keeper,  but  more — I  am  my  brother's  brother. 
We  have  at  last  awakened  to  the  fact  that  the  whole  is  greater  than 
the  part.  Too  often  heretofore  we  have  thought  of  a  social  class,  a 
segment  of  interests.  .  .  .  But  a  better  day  is  dawning  when  we  are 
alike  embracing  in  our  affections  the  whole  people,  the  lowly.no  less 
than  the  lofty  .  .  ."  (S.  C.  Mitchell,  in  South  Mobilizing  for  Social 
Service,  pp.  50-51).  Sir  Horace  Plunkett  has  recognized  that  the 
pioneers  of  England's  industrial  preeminence  "  have  been  often 
actuated  as  much  by  patriotic  motives  as  by  the  desire  for  gain  " 
(pp.  153-154)- 


233j  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLS  I27 

that  "  they  are  not  only  demonstrative ;  they  really  care  for 
one  another  in  most  affectionate  ways.  Helpfulness  is  not 
an  act  of  conscience :  it  is  an  impulse."145 

Understanding  the  straits  of  the  South  at  the  opening  of 
the  cotton  mill  era,  the  readiness  of  Southern  men  to  realize 
and  assume  responsibility  in  public  matters,  and  the  spirit 
of  social  service  which  characterized  the  awakening  to  a 
program  of  "  Real  Reconstruction,"  one  accepts  as  natural 
the  fact  that  cotton  manufactories  were  frequently  moti- 
vated by  the  desire  to  help  a  community  to  its  feet.  Often 
this  wish  was  joined,  and  very  properly  so,  with  usual  com- 
mercial promptings,  but  sometimes  it  controlled  alone. 

The  organization  of  the  Charleston  Manufacturing  Com- 
pany with  a  purpose  to  give  work  to  poor  people  of  the  city 
will  be  spoken  of  presently;  this  company  gives  admirable 
illustration  of  conception  of  a  cotton  mill  with  a  plan  of 
general  civic  betterment.  It  typified  the  concern  of  Char- 
leston for  the  welfare  of  the  whole  State,  a  concern  which, 
when  finally  manifest,  answered  to  Gregg's  utmost  solici- 
tude.146 A  notice  supplementing  an  advertisement  of  the 
Charleston  Manufacturing  Company  at  the  time  it  was 
soliciting  subscriptions  concluded :  "  The  advantages,  direct 
and  incidental,  accruing  to  every  citizen  of  Charleston 
from  this  industry  about  to  be  started  in  our  city  are  so 
manifest  that  those  who  have  inaugurated  the  enterprise 
have  every  reason  to  feel  confident  of  a  ready  response  to 
the  call  for  capital  and  of  abundant  success."147 

145  Page,  pp.  111-112.  Cf.  John  Skelton  Williams,  The  Billion 
Arrives,  pp.  16-17;  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  April  19, 
1917,  suggestion  for  non-interest-bearing  bonds  to  meet  war  ex- 
penditure. 

146  Such  cities,  in  "  the  heroism  with  which  they  meet  the  daily 
and  the  extraordinary  crises  that  time  brings  .  .  .  leaven  the  nation 
of  which  they  are  a  part "  Hemphill,  quoted  in  Kohn,  Charleston : 
Condensation  of  Jubilee  Industrial  Edition  of  News  and  Courier, 
p.  15).  Charleston  invested  in  South  Carolina  cotton  mills  that 
surplus  of  bank  capital  which  Gregg  had  seen  going  to  other  quar- 
ters, and  was  largely  responsible  for  incitement  to  an  industrial 
movement  that  witnessed  the  purchase  of  used  machinery  from  mills 
at  Newburyport,  Mass.,  perhaps  the  very  spindles  that  Gregg  had 
pointed  to  as  building  up  the  New  England  city. 

147  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  27,  1881 ;  cf .  ibid.,  Jan.  28, 


128  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [234 

In  1868,  Messrs.  Sprague,  Rhode  Island  manufacturers, 
undertook  to  develop  the  water  power  at  Columbia,  but 
failed;  the  property  passed  to  the  State  Canal  commission, 
and  some  Columbians  contributed  to  the  employment  of 
an  engineer  to  push  the  work.  In  February,  1880,  the  de- 
velopment was  taken  over  by  a  firm  of  Providence  engi- 
neers with  a  liberal  State  franchise,  but  this  scheme  also 
failed.  When  capitalists  of  Columbia  bought  the  rights 
they  set  forth  that  "  The  work  ...  is  one  of  great  magni- 
tude and  involves  expenditure  beyond  the  ability  of  this 
community.  Nor  is  the  interest  merely  local,  but  reaches 
out  to  every  part  of  the  State.  We  call,  therefore,  upon  all 
...  to  take  part  in  this  .  .  .  central  development.  .  .  ,"148 

The  inception  of  the  first  mill  at  Gaffney  has  been  men- 
tioned. This  was  distinctly  a  community  enterprise,  inspired 
and  pushed  through  principally  by  one  man  with  the  object 
of  the  good  of  the  little  town.  A  Tennessee  mountaineer, 
he  had  come  to  Gaffney  working  on  the  railroad,  and  stayed. 
There  was  little  enough  in  the  place  to  attract  anyone,  but 
he  held  high  hopes  for  its  development.  His  spirituel  face 
with  fine  eyes,  a  dreaminess  in  his  easy  movements,  a  vigor 
that  resides  nowhere  and  everywhere  in  him,  indicate  how 
in  spite  of  the  most  restricted  resources,  he  possesses  ca- 
pacity that  built  cotton  mills  out  of  hand.  As  a  contractor 
he  was  working  in  a  mill  village  near  his  town.  "  At  Clif- 
ton I'd  see  the  hands  paid  off,  the  amount  of  money  they 
spent.    I  was  convinced  that  stockholders  wouldn't  go  into 

1881.  One  of  the  chief  movers  in  this  mill,  when  it  had  failed  and 
manufacturing  was  to  be  revived  in  the  old  plant  by  a  new  company, 
received  from  a  fellow  citizen  a  note  thanking  him  "  in  the  name  of 
the  public  generally,  for  being  instrumental  ...  in  directing  Mr. 
Montgomery's  attention  to  the  Mill.  It  means  much  for  Charleston, 
and  is  only  another  of  your  constant  and  inspiring  efforts  for  the 
public  material  advancement  of  our  city.  A  hundred  men  like  your- 
self would  '  save  the  city.'  " 

148  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March  25,  1881.  Cf.  ibid., 
March  18,  1881 ;  Blackman,  p.  9.  "  The  capital,  because  it  was  the 
capital,  was  laid  in  ashes  by  Sherman's  troops.  In  the  person  of 
Columbia,  all  South  Carolina  was  ravaged.  .  .  .  The  city  which  suf- 
fered so  sorely  may  reasonably  expect  the  just  assistance  of  the 
State  .  .  ."  (News  and  Courier,  Jan.  25,  1882). 


235]  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLS  I29 

such  a  large  thing  unless  it  paid  them  to.  The  first  week- 
end I  could  get  away,  I  went  back  to  Gaffney  and  had  a  talk 
with  some  of  the  leading  citizens,  and  tried  to  and  finally 
did  persuade  them  that  to  establish  a  mill  here  would  build 
up  the  town  and  pay  good  dividends."  He  was  not  discour- 
aged that  Gaffney  had  no  water  power  like  Clifton,  and  re- 
solved to  make  steam  answer.  The  head  of  a  little  bank 
was  elected  president  of  the  mill  company,  $50,000  was  sub- 
scribed to  stock  and  a  charter  applied  for.  The  local  banker 
visited  a  New  York  bank  to  ask  for  cooperation,  but  re- 
turned deeply  discouraged.  Others  lost  interest,  but  the 
original  promoter  would  not.  He  sought  to  interest  the 
president  of  the  mill  at  Clifton  in  the  Gaffney  enterprise, 
and  received  confirmation  of  his  beliefs  that  he  could  suc- 
ceed, but  no  active  support.  He  next  attacked  the  super- 
intendent of  the  mill  at  Clifton,  sat  with  him  many  nights 
to  persuade  him  to  come  to  Gaffney  with  money  and  expe- 
rience and  head  the  venture,  and  finally  succeeded.140 

Notices  of  ceremonies  held  when  a  mill  commenced  opera- 
tion convey  sometimes  touchingly  the  pride  of  a  community 
in  the  plant  and  the  public  character  of  the  enterprise. 
Townspeople  were  like  children  with  a  very  precious  new 
toy ;  newspapers  described  the  arrangement  of  the  machin- 
ery in  the  factory  with  the  keenest  interest.150 

The  potency  of  associative  effort,  so  marked  in  Southern 
cotton  mill  building  in  this  period,  overcame  timidity  that 
might  have  been  prompted  by  a  frank  and  individual  can- 
vass of  attending  economic  facilities.  "The  mill  at  Albe- 
marle, North  Carolina,  had  its  origin  in  the  desire  of  the 
Efirds  to  have  a  mill  at  the  town.  Whether  there  existed 
real  advantages  or  not,  the  people  would  make  it  appear 
that  there  were  advantages  for  that  particular  location. 
Many  mills  were  located  at  places  where  there  was  the  spirit 
for  them,  rather  than  where  they  would  be,  economically, 

149  L.  Baker,  int.,  Gaffney. 

150  Cf.  Chronicle  and  Constitutionalist,  Augusta,  Feb.  23,  1882; 
Chronicle,  Augusta,  Nov.  11,  1883. 

9 


130  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN   THE   SOUTH        £236 

most  successful."151  A  Marylander  knowing  the  industry 
thoroughly  said  there  was  little  community  interest  in  his 
State,  but  that  "down  South  the  community  interest  was 
very  strong.  Every  little  town  wanted  a  mill.  If  it  couldn't 
get  a  big  one,  it  would  take  a  small  one;  if  not  a  sheeting, 
then  a  spinning  mill."152 

151  J.  L.  Hartsell,  int.,  Concord.  "  But  with  any  kind  of  manage- 
ment in  the  first  years  of  their  rise  they  made  money,  because  there 
was  no  competition  to  require  close  figuring."     Cf.Plunkett,  p.  186. 

152  Summerfield  Baldwin,  St.,  int.,  Baltimore.  A  mill  investor  of 
long  experience  believes  that  "  usually  community  good  played  a 
larger  part  than  monetary  gain  in  the  founding  of  a  cotton  mill" 
(Theodore  Klutz,  int.,  Salisbury).  "One  mill  would  encourage 
another,  but  the  greatest  factor  in  the  growth  of  cotton  mills  in 
the  South  was  community  pride"  (C.  S.  Morris,  int.,  Salisbury,  N. 
C,  Sept.  1,  1916).  The  story  of  the  building  of  a  mill  in  South 
Carolina,  told  by  a  participant,  is  typical.  "  The  town  had  a  popu- 
lation of  about  2500.  It  was  stagnant,  on  no  trunk  line  of  railroad. 
Perhaps  only  one  man  in  the  place  was  worth  as  much  as  $100,000. 
There  had  been  talk  of  building  a  mill;  a  retired  business  man,  with 
no  manufacturing  experience,  had  tried  and  failed.  Mr.  X.,  living 
in  Spartanburg,  had  been  in  charge  of  a  small  iron  concern.  He 
was  an  experienced  cotton  buyer  and,  though  not  wealthy,  had  great 
ability.  He  came  to  our  town  and  announced  to  gentlemen  there 
that  if  the  local  people  would  take  $75,000  in  stock  he  would  get 
up  the  rest  of  the  money  for  a  15,000-spindle  mill.  This  offered  a 
ray  of  hope.  This  was  throwing  out  a  rope  to  us.  Many  men  saw 
a  chance  of  getting  a  job  out  of  it.  But  in  the  town  and  county 
generally  a  tremendous  effort  was  made.  The  largest  subscription 
was  $2000.  By  raking  with  a  fine-tooth  comb  they  got  the  pledges 
for  $75,000.  The  average  man  at  first  didn't  give  a  thought  to  divi- 
dends. He  was  thinking  of  building  up  the  town.  I  was  running 
a  country  newspaper,  and  took  $300  in  stock  because  I  thought  it 
would  give  me  increased  circulation  and  job  work.  Every  merchant 
thought  he  would  get  some  trade  by  it.  There  were  some  who 
hadn't  even  an  indirect  motive,  who  just  wanted  to  see  the  town 
grow."  And  again,  another  said :  "  Captain  S.  E.  White  was  about 
as  near  the  type  of  the  old  plantation  head  as  South  Carolina  has 
had  since  the  war.  He  had  4000  acres  under  cultivation,  under  his 
direct  supervision.  Fort  Mill  was  just  a  hamlet  in  1887.  He  wanted 
to  see  it  become  a  town,  so  he  started  a  cotton  mill  in  it"  (William 
Banks,  int.,  Columbia,  S.  C,  Jan.  2,  1917).  "Colonel  R.  L.  Mc- 
Caughril,  a  banker  in  Newberry,  was  the  leading  spirit  in  the  town. 
He  wanted  to  see  the  place  grow,  so  he  started  a  mill"  (ibid.).  The 
same  was  true  of  the  Orr  Mill  at  Anderson.  Cf.  Charlotte  News, 
Textile  Ed.,  1917,  respecting  McAden  Mills.  "  Town  pride  played 
an  important  role.  The  cotton  mill  was  looked  upon  as  a  dynamo 
to  effect  changes  in  all  departments  of  life  in  a  community"  (Ster- 
ling Graydon,  int.,  Charlotte,  N.  C,  Sept.  4,  1916).  A  commission 
merchant  said :  "  As  a  rule  the  starters  of  mills  got  all  classes  of 
people  to  take  stock.    Usually  eight  or  ten  of  the  leading  men  of 


237]  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLS  I3I 

"A  good  deal  of  patriotism  developed,"  said  a  not  im- 
pressionable mill  man,  "and  every  town  would  vie  with 
others  in  building  mills.  Some  people  took  stock  and  sold 
it  at  a  discount  when  it  was  apparent  that  the  mill  would 
be  operated.  They  were  willing  to  give  so  much  to  secure 
the  mill  for  the  town."153  There  is  no  stronger  indication 
of  the  different  spirit  characterizing  the  building  of  mills 
in  the  eighties  as  contrasted  with  earlier  periods  than  the 
fact  that  after  1880  many  plants  were  located  within  the 
corporate  limits  of  towns  and  cities.  In  the  earlier  enter- 
prises community  spirit  had  not  counted,  and  even  the  mills 
of  the  seventies,  such  as  Piedmont,  were  taken  to  the  water 
powers.154  Eager  discussion  as  to  the  comparative  advan- 
tages of  water  and  steam  power  marked  this  transition. 
From  being  an  excuse  for  the  town,  the  cotton  mill  came 
to  be  erected  to  invigorate  a  place  that  was  languishing. 
It  has  been  said  that  at  least  half  the  South  Carolina  mills 
were  community  enterprises.  Later,  when  the  commercial 
spirit  was  more  pronounced,  factories  were  built  just  out- 
side the  corporation  to  escape  town  taxes.155 

In  the  case  of  some  investors  with  whom  assistance  to 
the  town  was  an  indirect  motive,  the  creation  of  a  payroll, 

the  town  could  be  got  to  serve  on  the  board — doctors,  merchants, 
lawyers,  planters.  There  would  be  one  leading  man  who  would 
take  the  thing  up  and  push  it  through.  He  would  come  to  see  us. 
Everybody  would  want  the  mill"  (Summerfield  Baldwin,  Sr.,  int., 
Baltimore).  "What  did  the  lawyer,  doctor  or  fertilizer  man  know 
about  running  a  mill?  Yet  it  got  to  the  point  where,  if  he  were 
prominent  in  the  town  and  did  not  become  a  cotton  mill  president, 
he  lost  his  social  position.  Of  course,  he  couldn't  do  that"  (W.  J. 
Thackston,  int.,'  Greenville).  George  A.  Gray,  as  a  mill  expert, 
organized  and  built  some  factories  and  managed  them  only  until 
they  were  running  smoothly,  having  been  drawn  in  by  an  inex- 
perienced community  (G.  A.  Gray,  Jr.,  and  J.  Lander  Gray,  int., 
Gastonia,  N.  C,  Sept.  14,  1916). 

153  E.  A.  Smyth,  int.,  Greenville,  S.  C,  Sept.  12,  1916. 

154  In  1880  Camperdown  was  the  only  factory  in  South  Carolina 
within  the  corporate  limits  of  a  city  (Blackman,  p.  13).  But  this, 
like  the  Enterprise  Factory  at  Augusta,  was  on  a  water  power  (Au- 
gusta Trade  Review,  Oct.,  1884). 

155  Cf.  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  28,  1881.  For  the  pros 
and  cons  of  county  versus  town  location,  cf.  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill, 
Commercial  Features,  pp.  34-35.  The  building  of  cotton  mills  to 
help  towns  was  entirely  sincere;  contrast  Clark,  in  South  in  Build- 
ing of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  pp.  273-274. 


132  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [238 

putting  more  money  in  circulation,  was  the  causal  stimulus. 
An  editorial  recommended  the  Charleston  Manufacturing 
Company  "  as  a  means  of  enlarging  'the  common  income. 
.  .  .  The  employment  given  to  hundreds  of  persons  .  .  . 
will  increase  the  value  of  house-property  at  once.  They 
who  earn  nothing  can't  spend  much.  It  was  calculated  last 
year  that  every  $228  invested  in  cotton  manufactures  in 
South  Carolina  supported  one  person.  ...  It  is  evident  that 
the  building  of  half-a-dozen  cotton  factories  would  revolu- 
tionize Charleston.  Two  or  three  million  dollars  additional 
poured  annually  into  the  pockets  of  the  shopkeepers  .  .  . 
would  make  them  think  that  the  commercial  millennium 
had  come."156 

To  give  employment  to  the  necessitous  masses  of  poor 
whites,  for  the  sake  of  the  people  themselves,  was  an  object 
animating  the  minds  of  many  mill  builders.  One  does  not 
have  to  go  outside  the  ranks  of  cotton  manufacturers  to 
find  denials  of  this,  but  a  study  of  the  facts  shows  how  fre- 
quent and  normal  was  the  philanthropic  incentive.157     It 

156  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  28,  1881.  Leroy  Springs 
wanted  a  payroll  at  Lancaster,  so  built  a  mill  (William  Banks,  int., 
Columbia).  "The  thing  that  built  most  mills  was  the  fact  that  the 
business  men  of  the  town  wanted  the  increased  payroll.  There  is 
an  annual  payroll  of  $2,000,000  in  Greenville  today,  and  it  was 
this  result  to  which  the  town  looked  in  the  establishment  of  mills  " 
(W.  J.  Thackston,  int.,  Greenville).  A  textile  editor  went  so  far 
as  to  say  that  "  the  principal  cause  of  the  cotton  mills  of  the  South 
was  that  the  people  had  to  be  given  something  to  do;  it  was  desired 
to  create  a  payroll"  (David  Clark,  int.,  Charlotte). 

157  The  genuineness  of  altruism  as  a  motive  in  the  Cotton  Mill 
Campaign  is  supported  by  observation  of  Southern  character  in 
other  particulars  and  especially  as  operative  in  this  period.  "It  is 
only  when  a  people,  united  by  a  common  suffering  and  bearing  a 
common  burden,  are  overheard  in  their  converse  with  one  another, 
it  is  only  when  the  South  speaks  freely  to  the  South,  that  one  may 
catch  that  real  spirit  of  noblesse,  oblige  which  has  so  largely  domi- 
nated the  development  of  Southern  life"  (Murphy,  p.  7).  Answer- 
ing the  statement  that  North  Carolinians  were  very  conservative,  an 
acquainted  speaker  recalled  how  one  enthusiastic  New  England 
woman  induced  the  State  to  spend  for  an  asylum  for  the  insane  at 
one  time  a  larger  sum  than  the  whole  annual  resources  of  the  Com- 
monwealth. "  Our  whole  history  is  full  of  such  incidents.  Almost 
every  noteworthy  thing  that  we  have  done  has  been  done  in  obe- 
dience to  an  impulse.  Conservative?  We  are  the  most  impulsive 
people  imaginable"  (Page,  pp.  9-10).    The  South  had  recently  gone 


239^  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLS  J33 

will  be  noticed  in  another  chapter  how  important  with 
Gregg  had  been  the  plan  to  afford  work  to  natives  des- 
perately needing  support.158  The  South  might  have  learned 
its  duty,  too,  from  the  kindly  admonitions  of  a  Rhode 
Islander,  Senator  James.  He  was  thirty  years  in  advance 
of  the  section  when  he  wrote: 

But  it  is  not  only  the  benefit  to  be  derived  in  a  direct  manner  to 
the  individual  manufacturer,  that  holds  out  a  strong  inducement  to 
the  South  to  go  largely  into  the  business — nor  yet,  alone,  the  pros- 
pect of  enriching  a  community  as  a  body.  Motives  of  philanthropy 
and  humanity  enter  into  the  calculation,  and  these  should  not  be  dis- 
regarded. This  is  a  subject  on  which,  though  it  demands  attention, 
we  would  speak  with  delicacy.  It  is  not  to  be  disguised  .  .  .  that  a 
degree  and  extent  of  poverty  and  destitution  exist  in  the  southern 
states,  among  a  certain  class  of  people,  almost  unknown  in  the  manu- 
facturing districts  of  the  North.  .  .  .  The  writer  has  no  disposition 
to  reproach  the  wealthy  for  the  existence  of  such  a  state  of  things. 
He  is  well  aware  that  it  is  the  result  of  circumstances  which  have  to 
them  been  unavoidable.  But  he  cannot  resist  the  conviction  that, 
when  a  fitting  opportunity  presents  itself  to  the  wealthy  men  of  the 
South  to  obviate  these  evils  .  .  .  and  that  even  in  a  way  to  benefit 
themselves,  they  can  hardly  be  held  guiltless  in  case  of  refusal  or 
neglect  to  apply  the  remedy.159 

Hammett,  in  his  Piedmont  mill  of  the  seventies,  very 
regardful  of  hi9  responsibility  toward  his  unfortunate  fel- 
lows, anticipated  by  a  few  years  the  action  of  many  factory 
projectors.100    Sentiment  must  be  strong  to  find  place  in  an 

through  so  much  misery  that  the  body  politic  was  closely  knit;  cal- 
culations of  commerce  were  for  the  time  relaxed,  and  leaders  were 
thinking  for  the  whole  people.  Cf .  Lewis  G.  Janes,  "  The  Economic 
Value  of  Altruism,"  in  Social  Economist,  July,  1893,  p.  16.  As  to 
the  effect  of  the  Civil  War  in  rousing  the  South  to  extraordinary 
measures,  cf.  Andrews,  pp.  340-341. 

158  To  the  stockholders  of  his  Graniteville  Mill  he  said :  "  We  may 
really  regard  ourselves  as  the  pioneers  in  developing  the  character 
of  the  poor  people  of  South  Carolina,"  and  he  called  the  factory 
village  an  asylum  for  widows  and  orphans  and  families  brought  to 
ruin  (see  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  21). 

159  "I  ._.  .appeal  to  the  planter  of  the  South,  as  well  as  to  every 
other  capitalist.  Let  your  attachment  to  your  interest  and  the  in- 
terests of  the  community,  united  with  love  for  your  species,  combine 
to  stimulate  you  to  enter,  with  resolution,  this  field  of  enterprise 
.  .  ."  (quoted  in  DeBow,  vol.  i,  p.  241). 

160  Samuel  Stradley,  int.,  Greenville,  S.  C,  Sept.  12,  1916.  It  has 
been  pertinently  said  of  the  years  following  1880:  "There  was  no 
thought  ...  in  those  times,  with  regard  to  who  should  work  or  how 
many  hours  they  should  work.     The  problem  was  not  one  of  seeking 


134  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [24O 

advertisement  soliciting  subscriptions  to  stock,  yet  the 
Charleston  Manufacturing  Company  frankly  said :  "  The 
necessity  of  establishing  manufactures  in  our  city,  not  only 
as  a  profitable  means  of  utilizing  capital,  but  more  espe- 
cially for  furnishing  employment  to  many  in  our  midst,  has 
been  long  felt.  To  put  this  matter  into  practical  operation, 
a  few  gentlemen  applied  to  the  last  Legislature  and  ob- 
tained a  most  favorable  charter.  .  .  ,"161  A  committee  of 
the  State  Agricultural  Society  of  Georgia  recommended 
the  Clement  Attachment  to  planters  with  capital  as  "  fur- 
nishing means  of  support  to  needy  and  worthy  people,  to 
wit,  women  and  children  principally,"  and  as  keeping  at 
home  money  "  to  give  comfort  and  support  to  the  planting 
community."162 

No  undertaking  was  born  more  emphatically  in  the  im- 
pulse to  furnish  work  than  the  Salisbury  Cotton  Mills.  All 
the  circumstances  of  the   founding  of   this   factory   were 

or  creating  wealth ;  it  was  essentially  one  of  employment,  of  human 
welfare  in  the  sense  of  providing  instrumentalities  by  the  use  of 
which  men,  women  and  children  could  earn  a  livelihood.  The  exi- 
gent demand  for  the  bare  necessaries  of  life,  which  could  be  gotten 
in  the  cotton  mills  of  that  period  only  by  the  combined  toil  of  the 
whole  family,  overshadowed  all  other  considerations.  Literally  it 
was  a  question  of  'bread  and  meat,'  and  the  mills  provided  work 
for  thousands  who  could  not  otherwise  subsist"  (R.  Charlton 
Wright,  in  Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  1917).  Cf.  the  writer's 
"  End  of  Child  Labor,"  in  Survey,  Aug.  23,  1919.  "  There  was  much  \ 
in  the  humanitarian  movement.  People  saw  that  the  cotton  mill  man  [ 
was  a  benefactor.  Unlike  the  profit  of  the  bank,  his  money  went  to 
feed  the  poor  people.  This  contagion  spread  and  had  a  great  deal 
to  do  with  the  building  of  mills"  (G.  W.  Ragan,  int.,  Gastonia,  N. 
C,  Sept.  14,  1916).  ~*~] — 'J 

161  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  27,  1881.  One  inquiring 
among  surviving  incorporators  of  this  enterprise  is  told  today  that 
"  our  idea  in  starting  the  company  was  that  there  were  many  people 
here  who  wanted  work,  needed  it "  (W.  P.  Carrington,  int.,  Charles- 
ton, Dec.  27,  1916). 

162  Observer,  Raleigh,  Aug.  24,  1880.  "Aside  from  purely  mer- 
cenary considerations,"  said  an  appeal  to  Charlestonians  to  take 
stock  in  mills  at  Columbia,  "...  is  the  incalculable  benefit  to  be 
derived  from  the  employment  of  thousands  of  unwilling  idlers  .  .  . 
in  the  State,  the  women  and  girls  for  whom  it  is  so  hard  to  find 
healthful  and  profitable  work"  (News  and  Courier,  Charleston, 
April  13,  1881).  It  must  be  remembered  that  whites,  particularly 
women,  could  not  compete  with  negroes  in  certain  occupations,  and 
in  "  servile  "  ones  would  not. 


24l]  THE    RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  135 

singularly  in  keeping  with  the  philanthropic  prompting. 
The  town  of  Salisbury,  North  Carolina,  in  1887  had  done 
nothing  to  recover  from  the  war.  It  was  full  of  saloons, 
wretched,  unkempt.  It  happened  that  an  evangelistic  cam- 
paign was  conducted;  Mr.  Pearson,  remembered  as  a  lean, 
intense  Tennesseean,  preached  powerfully.  A  tabernacle 
was  erected  for  the  meeting,  which  lasted  a  month  and, 
being  undenominational,  drew  from  the  whole  town  and 
countryside.  The  evangelist  declared  that  the  great  moral- 
ity in  Salisbury  was  to  go  to  work,  and  that  corruption, 
idleness  and  misery  could  not  be  dispelled  until  the  poor 
people  were  given  an  opportunity  to  become  productive. 
The  establishment  of  a  cotton  mill  would  be  the  most  Chris- 
tian act  his  hearers  could  perform.  "  He  gave  Salisbury  a 
moral  dredging  which  made  the  people  feel  their  respon- 
sibilities as  they  had  not  before,  and  made  them  do  some- 
thing for  these  folks.  There  had  been  little  talk  of  manu- 
facturing before  Pearson  came ;  there  had  been  some  tobacco 
factories  in  the  town,  but  they  had  failed.  The  Salisbury 
Cotton  Mills  grew  out  of  a  moral  movement  to  help  the 
lower  classes,  largely  inspired  by  this  campaign.  Without 
the  moral  issue,  the  financial  interest  would  have  come  out 
in  the  long  run,  but  the  moral  considerations  brought  the 
matter  to  a  focus."163 

163  O.  D.  Davis,  int.,  Salisbury,  N.  C,  Sept.  1,  1916.  Cf.  Page,  p. 
12  ff. ;  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1880,  "  Factory  System,"  by 
Carroll  D.  Wright,  pp.  4-5.  The  spirit  of  that  evangelistic  campaign 
still  rests  upon  those  all  along  connected  with  the  enterprise.  Mr. 
Davis  remarked  the  fact  that  three  ministers  of  Salisbury*  were 
prominently  connected  with  the  inception  of  the  mill.  One  of  them, 
Mr.  Murdock,  was  its  secretary  and  treasurer  and  later  president. 
The  first  minute-book  shows  how  closely  connected  were  preacher 
and  manufacturer,  even  in  point  of  time.  An  account  copied  into  it 
from  the  North  Carolina  Herald  (the  local  paper)  of  Nov.  9,  1887, 
headed  "  The  Cotton  Factory,"  says :  "  Mr.  Pearson,  in  a  lecture 
yesterday  afternoon,  dwelt  upon  the  fact  that  the  great  many  poor 
.  _.  .  people  we  have  here  ought  to  be  and  must  be  helped  not  by 
gifts  and  alms  but  by  a  chance  to  make  an  honest  living.  That  a 
cotton  factory  would  be  the  remedy.  Pursuant  to  these  urgent 
appeals  a  large  number  of  citizens  gathered  this  morning  in  the 
Warehouse  and  organized  by  calling  upon  Rev.  F.  J.  Murdock  to  act 
as  chairman.  .  .  .  Mr.  Murdock,  in  strong,  eloquent,  and  earnest 
words  pointed  out  that  it  had  almost  become  a  necessity  to  build  a 


I36  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [242 

Mr.  Murdock  seems  to  have  been  the  chief  local  inspir- 
ator of  the  mill  at  Salisbury ;  before  the  factory  was  built 
he  had  established  a  building  and  loan  association.  A  very 
similar  case  is  that  of  Dr.  Jacobs  at  Clinton,  South  Caro- 
lina. He  found  that  the  sodden  little  town  needed  to  have 
industry  preached  to  it.  He  inspired  a  merchant  to  build  a 
cotton  mill,  took  the  lead  in  urging  improvements  for  the 
community,  and  succeeded  in  founding  an  orphanage,  funds 
of  which  were  invested  in  manufactories  of  Clinton. 

On  the  whole,  North  Carolina  was  probably  later  in  re- 
sponding to  the  philanthropic  impulse  than  South  Carolina. 
The  local  Democratic  press  censured  a  North  Carolina 
congressman,  an  Independent,  in  1886  for  a  speech  urging 
mills  as  means  of  employment  of  poor  people,  because  this 
was  opposed  to  the  interest  of  the  farmer.164  Yet  a  factory 
was  built  in  the  suburbs  of  Raleigh  the  next  year  partly 
with  this  purpose.165 

As  late  as  1902  a  representative  manufacturer  declared 
that  although  negro  labor  was  feasible,  abundant,  and 
would  be  cheapest,  the  managements  "  have  recognized  the 

cotton  mill  here  to  help  the  poor  whites,  quoting  the  Hon.  J.  S.  Hen- 
derson's words — that  next  to  religion  Salisbury  needed  a  cotton  fac- 
tory. Rev.  J.  Rumple,  D.D.,  seconded  Mr.  Murdock's  appeal.  He 
said  that  he  knew  so  well  the  appealing  condition  of  the  poor  whites 
of  our  town  and  that  a  cotton  factory  would  be  a  sufficient  remedy. 
Mr.  I.  H.  Faust  urged  three  reasons  for  the  building  of  a  mill.  1. 
Increased  general  prosperity  of  the  town.  2.  Benevolence  and  char- 
ity in  giving  the  poor  a  chance  to  earn  a  living.  3.  Cotton  mills  pay 
a  handsome  interest  to  investors."  Others  spoke  of  the  profits  of 
all  Southern  mills,  of  the  health  of  Salisbury  as  an  asset,  and  "  Maj. 
S.  W.  Cole,  the  veteran  advocate  of  cotton  mills,  spoke  earnestly 
and  fervently  in  favor  of  the  undertaking."  A  committee  appointed 
to  solicit  subscriptions  met  the  same  afternoon.  Subsequent  items 
show  that  by  Dec.  15  organization  was  complete,  some  $60,000  having 
been  locally  subscribed,  and  a  successful  manufacturer  in  Concord, 
nearby,  who  was  consulted  in  the  enterprise,  being  elected  president. 
One  director  was  a  minister;  the  others  were  pillars  in  Salisbury 
churches.  "  The  mill  was  religion-pervaded  from  the  outset."  It 
was  decided  at  the  start  not  to  have  a  company  store,  thrift  has  been 
consistently  encouraged  in  the  operatives,  the  mill  has  never  run  at 
night  (Theodore  Klutz,  int.,  Salisbury).  Especially  through  Mr. 
Murdock's  influence,  several  boys  growing  up  in  the  mill  have  be- 
come ministers  (Charlotte  News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917). 

164  John  Nichols,  int.,  Raleigh. 

165  A.  A.  Thompson,  int.,  Raleigh. 


243]  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLs  137 

fact  that  the  mill  life  is  the  only  avenue  open  today  to  our 
poor  whites,  and  we  have  with  earnestness  and  practically 
without  exception  kept  that  avenue  open  to  the  white  man 
alone "  to  provide  an  escape  from  competition  with  the 
blacks.166 

It  has  been  seen  that  the  spirit  for  manufacture  in  the 
South  was  born  pretty  much  irrespective  of  the  direction 
which  activity  was  to  take.  Bearing  this  in  mind,  if  one 
were  asked  what  inspirited  cotton  mills,  he  would  probably 
answer  first,  "  Presence  of  the  raw  material."  There  is 
everything  to  commend  this  reply.  Tn  the  beginning  South- 
erners did  not  reason  out  all  the  implications  of  their  thus 
setting  up  cotton  factories  in  cotton  fields.  If  success  at- 
tended the  pressing  present,  this  was  enough.  Moreover, 
New  Englanders,  as  noticed  in  the  case  of  Edward  Atkin- 
son, more  able  to  calculate  upon  the  future,  sought  often  to 
discourage  a  'movement  which  they  realized  portended 
danger  for  their  section  as  the  principal  American  seat  of 
the  industry,  and  in  this  way  the  outlook  of  the  South  was 
clouded.  Ten  years  after  the  opening  of  the  period,  how- 
ever, a  writer  could  put  the  matter  plainly,  justifying  the 
South's  best  hopes  and  rebuking  New  England's  dissimula- 
tion by  saying:  "The  ultimate  transfer  of  the  cotton  indus- 
try from  New  England  to  the  South  may  be  regarded  as  an 
inevitable  consequence  of  industrial  development,  which 
should  be  neither  feared  nor  prevented.  .  .  .  There  is  no 
more  reason  why  cotton  cloth  should  be  manufactured  in 
Lancashire  than  why  cucumbers  should  be  raised  in  Ice- 
land."167 

166  See  testimony  of  Lewis  W.  Parker,  Hearing  before  Committee 
of  Judiciary,  House  of  Representatives,  April  29,  1002,  p.  11  ff.  This 
statement  would  bear  some  modification  today.  Perhaps  at  the  out- 
set some  saw  in  the  cotton  mills  not  just  the  means  of  immediate 
employment,  but  the  first  step  toward  a  better  grade  of  work.  Until 
the  present  these  have  been  disappointed  ( W.  W.  Ball,  int.,  Columbia, 
Jan.  1,  1917).  These  well-wishers  of  the  operatives  have  not  been 
willing  to  accept  continued  evidences  of  philanthropy  in  welfare 
work  for  the  more  wholesome  self-help  to  be  gained  when  Southern 
mill  hands,  like  successive  generations  in  New  England,  assisted  by 
a  greater  diversity  of  industry  in  the  section,  reach  out  to  more 
skilled  employments. 

167  Social  Economist,   May,    1891,   p.   152  ff.     On   the   purpose   of 


I38  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN   THE    SOUTH        [244 

From  the  outset,  though,  convinced  of  the  strength  of  its 
position,  the  South  put  by  hypocritical  gratuities :  "  Sir,  it 
matters  not  what  anyone  may  say  to  the  contrary,  common 
sense  tells  us  that  other  things — machinery,  skilled  labor, 
motive  power,  and  facilities  of  shipment — being  equal,  a 
cotton  factory  in  the  midst  of  cotton  fields  must  prove  more 
profitable  than  the  same  concern  a  thousand  miles  from  the 
base  of  supply  could  possibly  be."168  "Leave  it  to  the 
North  to  make  the  finer,  lighter  and  fancy  goods,"  Ham- 
mett  counselled.  "  Their  manufacture  will  come  South  in 
due  time  if  it  should  be  desirable  to  make  them.  .  .  .  We 
need  have  no  fear  of  competition  in  making  the  heavy 
goods  from  the  North.  They  will  never  build  another  mill 
there  to  make  them."169 

English  manufacturers  to  build  mills  at  the  South,  cf.  C.  C.  Baldwin, 
quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  July  II,  1881.  The  South 
was  not  entirely  without  similar  penetration  much  earlier.  Of  E. 
M.  Holt,  manufacturing  in  North  Carolina  long  before  the  war,  it 
is  said  that  "  To  him  it  seemed  a  geographical  and  economical  incon- 
sistency and  perversity  that  this'  staple  should  be  carried  thousands 
of  miles  from  the  place  of  its  growth  to  be  made  into  cloth,  much 
of  which  was  to  be  brought  back  ...  to  clothe  the  very  people  who 
had  produced  it;  ...  he  foresaw  that  not  Manchester,  not  New 
England,  but  the  South  was  to  control  the  cotton  industry  of  the 
world"  (Martin  H.  Holt,  in  Biographical  Hist,  of  N.  C,  vol.  vii,  pp. 
182-183).  A  New  Englander  said  of  the  South,  also  before  the 
war :  "  As  respects  all  raw  materials,  especially  that  of  a  bulky  char- 
acter, economy  dictates  that,  all  other  things  being  equal,  they  should 
be  wrought  on  the  spot  on  which  they  are  produced.  .  .  .  There  may 
be  some  exceptions  to  this  rule,  but  .  .  .  there  is  none  in  favor  of 
the  transportation  of  cotton  to  a  distant  market"  (Charles  T.  James, 
in  DeBow,  vol.  11,  p.  236  ff.).  Cf.  Olmsted,  pp.  165,  542-543.  Atkin- 
son in  1880,  though  speaking  especially  for  New  England,  really  put 
the  case  for  the  South  when  he  said  that  "  the  supremacy  in  the  art 
of  converting  cotton  into  cloth  must  ultimately  fall  to  that  country 
or  section  which  possesses  .  .  .  proximity  to  the  source  of  raw  mate- 
rial" (U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  Cotton  Manufacture,  p.  8). 
For  clear  statements  in  the  South  in  1880,  cf.  Blackman,  p.  14,  and 
prefactory  leading  article. 

168  See  Gannon,  p.  6  ff.  Later,  Grady  declared.  "  The  industries  of 
other  sections — distant  from  the  source  of  supply — may  be  based  on 
artificial  conditions  that  may  in  time  be  broken.  But  the  industrial 
system  of  the  South  is  built  on  a  rock — and  it  cannot  be  shaken !  " 
(pp.  206-207).    Cf.  ibid.,  p.  80  ff. 

169  Quoted  in  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Feb.  1,  1883. 
"  The  water  powers  are  located  in  the  midst  of  the  cotton  fields, 
from  which  a  large  part  of  the  cotton  consumed  may  be  purchased 
direct  from  the  producer  and  delivered  at  the  mills.  ...  A  very 


245]  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLs  139 

Nor  did  some  Northern  papers  at  this  time  fail  to  recog- 
nize the  superiority  of  Southern  manufactories  in  posses- 
sion of  the  raw  material.  "  They  have  the  advantage  of 
cotton  location,  and,  when  they  have  secured  new  and  im- 
proved machinery,  will  do  an  unrivalled  business. "170  The 
pertinence  of  such  recognition  was  admitted  by  New  Eng- 
land manufacturers  in  deed  if  not  in  word.  Their  appeal  for 
lower  freight  rates  "  on  account  of  the  growing  opposition 
of  Southern  cotton  mills  .  .  .  was  a  plea  of  weakness.  .  .  . 
The  manufacturers  of  New  England  would  do  well  to  heed 
the  advice  of  the  New  York  Times  .  .  .  and  give  up  the 
attempt  to  compete  with  Southern  mills  on  coarse  goods."171 

Many  factories  were  built  right  in  the  cotton  fields,  just 

material  advantage  is  that  it  comes  direct  from  the  gins,  is  clean, 
has  not  been  compressed  for  shipment  .  .  .  and  as  a  consequence 
works  here  infinitely  .  '.  .  easier  .  .  ."  (ibid.,  quoted  in  News  and 
Courier,  Charleston,  Aug.  I,  1881).  "Among  the  public  enterprises 
which  have  been  started  in  Memphis  during  the  past  twelve  months 
none  have  attracted  more  .  .  .  interest  than  the  '  Pioneer  Cotton 
Mill.'  ....  With  the  great  staple  at  our  doors  it  does  seem  strange 
that  it  should  be  sent  to  the  Eastern  States  or  to  Europe  to  be 
manufactured  into  goods  that  will  be  sent  back  here  for  sale  at  a 
handsome  profit"  (Memphis  Avalanche,  quoted  in  Manufacturers' 
Record,  Baltimore,  Dec.  28,  1882).  Cf.  ibid.,  Dec.  14,  1882,  March 
8,  1883. 

170  Manufacturer  and  Industrial  Gazette,  Springfield,  Mass.,  quoted 
in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb.  3,  1881.  "  They  can  save 
freights,  buy  cheaper  and  hire  cheaper  labor.  They  save  buyer's 
commission,  and  warehouse  delivery  and  cartage,  sampling,  classing, 
pressing,  shipping,  marine  risks,  and  freight  and  carriage  to  interior 
towns,  which  amounts  in  all  to  some  seven  dollars  per  bale.  .  .  . 
This  makes  a  tax  of  eighteen  per  cent  which  Fall  River  pays  in 
competition  with  Columbus.  ...  As  yet  the  South  manufactures 
principally  coarser  goods  .  .  .  but  the  time  is  not  far  distant  when 
it  will  come  to  make  prints,  cambrics,  laces,  and  all  the  finer  quali- 
ties of  staple  goods."  Cf.  Philadelphia  Record,  quoted  in  News  and 
Observer,  Raleigh,  Dec.  16,  1880.  By  1882  it  was  being  said  that 
Northern  mills  must  make  fabrics  of  higher  grade  or  go  out  of 
existence.  "  Much  invested  capital  will  have  to  be  sunk,  much  good 
machinery  cast  aside,  and  much  acquired  skill  regarded  as  useless ; 
but  there  can  be  no  wisdom  in  hesitating  to  make  the  sacrifice  when 
the  refusal  to  make  it  means  ruin  at  any  rate"  (Textile  Record, 
Philadelphia,  quoted  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manu- 
facturers' Record,  Oct.  28,  1882).  Cf.  Boston  Commercial  Bulletin, 
quoted  in  ibid.,  Sept.  23,  1882;  April  5,  1883. 

171  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  March  29,  1883.  Cf.  a  ref- 
erence to  a  protest  to  the  Massachusetts  legislature  against  a  58-hour 
bill  in  1890,  in  Social  Economist,  May,  1891,  p.  159. 


I4O  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN   THE   SOUTH        [[246 

as  saw  mills  are  placed  in  the  woods.  The  Woodlawn  and 
Lawrence  mills,  at  Lowell,  North  Carolina,  even  conducted 
their  own  cotton  plantation.172  Although  a  water  power 
mill  at  Cedar  Falls,  in  the  same  State,  had  the  disadvantage 
that  its  product  must  be  hauled  twenty-seven  miles  to  High 
Point,  most  of  the  raw  cotton  was  bought  loose  from  the 
field.173  A  cotton  planter  built  a  factory  at  Enterprise,  Mis- 
sissippi, which  took  cotton  loose  from  the  gin.174 

Founders  of  the  industry  and  others  expressed  the  pre- 
eminence in  the  mind  of  mill  builders  of  proximity  to  cot- 
ton. "There  seemed  nothing  else  in  the  South  for  manu- 
facturing to  turn  to  but  cotton."175  "  Their  whole  purpose 
and  idea  was  to  build  mills  right  in  the  heart  of  the  cotton 
fields."176  "  In  establishing  cotton  mills  the  chief  advan- 
tage, in  the  minds  of  Southern  people,  was  proximity  to 
the  raw  cotton."177 

172  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
June  3,  1882.    Several  mills  owned  cotton  lands. 

173  W.  R.  Odell,  int.,  Concord.  Tompkins  built  a  plant  at  Edge- 
field, S.  C,  for  which  cotton  was  secured  unpacked  from  the  field 
(J.  H.  M.  Beatty,  int.,  Jan.  3,  1917,  Columbia).  Many  mills  are  to 
be  seen  today  standing  in  cotton  fields  (cf.  Columbia  Record,  Tex- 
tile Ed.,  1916.  Cf.  ibid.,  as  to  Lancaster  Mill's).  The  Proximity 
mill,  Greensboro,  was  named  with  reference  to  nearness  to  raw 
material  (cf.  James  A.  Greer,  in  Textile  Manufacturer,  Charlotte, 
Aug.  19,  1915).  The  treasurer  of  the  company  thinks  proximity 
to  cotton  was  the  prime  cause  of  the  Southern  industry  (Bernard 
Cone,  int.,  Greensboro,  N.  C,  Aug.  30,  1916).  Cf.  Charlotte  News, 
Textile  Ed.,  1917,  advertisement  recommending  Monroe,  North 
Carolina,  as  a  location  for  mills  because  of  excellent  and  abun- 
dant cotton  of  Union  County;  cf.  advertisement  of  P.  H.  Hanes 
Knitting  Co.,  in  Every  Week,  Nov.  12,  1917,  p.  15. 

174  Mississippi  Beacon,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston, 
June  18,  1881. 

175  James  W.  Cannon,  int.,  Concord,  N.  C,  Jan.  6,  1917. 

176  Tracy  I.  Hickman,  int.,  Augusta,  Ga.,  Dec.  27,  1916. 

177  Theodore  Klutz,  int.,  Salisbury.  "  The  whole  development  was 
the  result  of  the  desire  of  the  people  to  use  their  raw  product" 
(William  Banks,  int.,  Columbia).  "They  had  in  mind  all  over  the 
South  the  fact  that  the  cotton  was  on  the  ground  "  (James  Simons, 
int.,  Charleston,  S.  C,  Dec.  27,  1916).  "There  came  a  different 
viewpoint.  The  old  South  was  done  away  with.  The  problem  was 
to  utilize  the  thing  nearest  at  hand  to  support  a  large  portion  of  our 
people"  (Henry  E.  Fries,  int.,  Winston-Salem).  "Other  things 
were  side  issues.  Proximity  to  raw  cotton  was  the  great  advantage, 
as  it  appeared  to  us  "  (A.  B.  Murray,  int.,  Charleston,  S.  C,  Dec.  28, 
1916).     Some  helps  to  development  through  this  proximity  were  not 


2473  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLS  H1 

The  causes  of  manufacturing  development  reviewed  and 
others  to  be  touched  upon,  sometimes  exerted  a  secondary 
influence  through  example  of  factories  already  in  opera- 
tion, or  even  of  old  mills  which  had  gone  out  of  existence. 
The  stimulus  lent  by  the  older  establishments,  those  founded 
before  1870,  was  largely  through  individuals  or  families, 
wa9  personal,  not  inspiring  new  erections  at  the  hands  of 
men  not  in  some  way  connected  with  the  original  ventures ; 
on  the  other  hand,  a  mill  built  after  1880  often  had  a  social 
bearing,  attracting  to  the  industry  enterprisers  and  commu- 
nities with  no  manufacturing  tradition.     Of  course,  there 

foreseen  by  the  first  mill  builders.  Actual  spinning  tests  of  the 
staple  may  be  made,  instead  of  relying  upon  conventional  grading 
(cf.  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill  Processes  and  Calculations,  pp.  4-5)- 
Atkinson  did  not  realize  that  in  this  way  only  mills  in  the  fields 
could  improve  preparation  of  cotton  for  manufacture.  Southern 
mills,  moreover,  may  rely  upon  a  reserve  in  the  hands  of  farmers, 
and  not  stock  up  in  the  picking  season  as  heavily  as  Northern  fac- 
tories. A  few  smaller  mills  even  buy  cotton  as  they  receive  orders 
for  goods  (cf.  Copeland,  pp.  182-183).  Nor  did  the  founders  guess 
that  supposed  benefits  of  contiguity  to  cotton  would  vanish  and 
actually  turn  out  as  hindrances.  Where  mills  have  concentrated, 
local  cotton  does  not  satisfy  the  demand.  The  local  price  is  some- 
times driven  above  that  of  spot  in  New  York.  Cotton  brought  from 
the  Delta  or  other  distant  points  bears  a  relatively  or  absolutely 
higher  freight  charge  than  staple  shipped  to  New  England  or  Liver- 
pool. Also,  the  product  must  be  sent  north  to  market  and,  in  most 
cases,  to  be  finished.  Any  saving  in  purchase  of  raw  material  locally, 
amounting  hardly  ever  to  more  than  half  a  cent  a  pound,  is  about 
counterbalanced  by  freight  on  goods.  When  Southern  mills  were 
few  and  small,  presence  of  cotton  was  a  real  asset,  and  product 
was  often  sold  locally.  Unless  all  forecasts  are  futile,  the  present 
is  a  "  period  of  transition  "  for  the  Southern  mills  which  will  give 
way  to  more  widespread  distribution  of  plants  (overcoming  the 
singular  disadvantage  of  some  factories,  such  as  those  at  Gastonia 
which  can  use  no  local  cotton  for  their  manufacture  of  fine  yarns), 
to  finishing  of  product  at  the  South  and  the  development  of  a  South- 
ern goods  market,  when  old  superiorities  of  location  will  reappear 
and  prove  greater  than  ever.  (These  points  were  substantiated  by 
interviews  with  John  W.  Fries,  Winston-Salem;  George  W.  Wil- 
liams, Charleston;  Charles  Estes  and  Tracy  I.  Hickman,  Augusta; 
J.  B.  Cleveland,  Spartanburg;  Benjamin  Gossett,  Anderson;  Joseph 
H.  Separk,  Gastonia.  For  fuller  discussions  see  Copeland,  pp.  36- 
37;  Uttley,  p.  39  ff.;  Thompson,  p.  271;  the  writer's  Factors  in 
Future  of  Cotton  Manufacture  in  South,  in  Manufacturers'  Record, 
Baltimore,  May  10,  1917;  an  excellently  detailed  illustration  of  draw- 
backs in  regard  to  freight  charges  is  contained  in  the  petition  of 
certain  up-country  South  Carolina  mills  to  the  State  Railroad  Com- 
mission, Feb.  24,  1903). 


142  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        ^248 

were  exceptions  in  both  cases.  Graniteville,  more  than 
other  ante-bellum  manufactories,  possessed!  public  signifi- 
cance; it  is  difficult  to  tell  how  far  promoters  of  mills  at 
Augusta  and  elsewhere  knew  Gregg  or  were  trained  in  his 
factory,  and  how  far  they  were  inspired  simply  by  the  ex- 
ample of  Graniteville.178 

The  factory  is  said  to  have  had  a  fifty-year  record  of 
dividends.179  It  is  likely  very  true  that  its  success  had  an 
influence  in  the  Cotton  Mill  Campaign  of  the  eighties 
through  Dawson  of  The  News  and  Courier,  who  frequently 
referred  to  it.180 

Other  old  factories  furnished  more  exclusively  personal 
incentive.  George  Makepeace  founded  little  mills  on  Deep 
River  in  North  Carolina.  Others,  such  as  the  Fries  family 
at  Salem,  learned  from  him.  Ante-bellum  manufacturing 
of  the  Fries'  was  the  forerunner  of  their  post-bellum  activi- 
ties. The  Pattersons  at  Roanoke  Rapids  were  connected 
with  the  Fries  family.  The  grandfather  of  a  mill  president 
of  Raleigh  bad  been  a  stockholder  in  two  small  mills  at 
Cedar  Falls,  and  knew  Makepeace.  The  pioneer  cotton 
manufacturer  of  Durham  had  clerked  in  the  store  at  Cedar 
Falls.181 

William  Bates,  who  came  from  Slater's  mill  at  Paw- 
tucket,  Rhode  Island,  was  important  because  he  influenced 
his  son-in-law,  Hammett,  as  has  been  noticed  earlier.  Wil- 
liam Entwistle,  an  Englishman  with  textile  training  in  Lan- 
cashire, worked  in  Lawrence,  Massachusetts.  He  came 
South  with  the  intention  of  farming,  but  entered  Granite- 

178  Cf.  Clark,  History  of  Manufactures,  p.  553  ff.  The  influence 
of  Graniteville  has  been  discussed  more  fully  in  the  first  chapter. 

179  Tracy  I.  Hickman,  int.,  Augusta. 

180  H.  R.  Buist,  int.,  Charleston,  S.  C,  Dec.  28,  1916.  Local  advo- 
cates of  mills  sometimes  harked  back  to  successes  at  Graniteville  and 
Augusta  (cf.  Society  Hill  correspondence,  News  and  Courier, 
Charleston,  Feb.  23,  1881).  Graniteville  had  personal  ties  with  many 
later  establishments.  The  grandfather  of  LeRoy  Springs,  pioneer 
manufacturer  of  Lancaster,  was  one  of  the  organizers  of  Gregg's 
company  (Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  1916).  The  projector  of 
the  Rock  Hill  Factory  was  the  son  of  a  Graniteville  founder  (Wil- 
liam Banks,  int.,  Columbia). 

181  A.  A.  Thompson,  int.,  Raleigh. 


249]  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLS  *43 

ville  as  a  section  hand  in  1869,  then  was  at  Langley  and 
removed  to  the  Great  Falls  mill  at  Rockingham,  North 
Carolina,  to  become  overseer  of  weaving.  Great  Falls  was 
itself  ibuilt  on  the  site  of  the  much  older  Richmond  Manu- 
facturing Company's  factory.  Mr.  Entwistle  has  been  re- 
sponsible for  much  mill  building  at  Rockingham  and  has 
given  technical  advice  to  other  projectors,  such  as  Mr. 
Cooper  at  Henderson.  The  Leak  family,  owning  mills  at 
Rockingham,  two  generations  ago  had  the  Richmond  Manu- 
facturing Company.182 

Coming  to  mills  which  were  patterns  to  communities 
rather  than  individual  enterprisers,  it  is  clear  that  Ham- 
mett's  Piedmont  Factory,  projected  in  1873  but  delayed  in 
commencing  operation  until  1876,  was  "a  crucial  experi- 
ment " ;  that  in  a  real  sense  "  the  success  of  the  mills  of  the 
South  depended  upon  Piedmont,  the  initial  business."183  It 
may  almost  be  said  that  Hammett  belonged  to  the  develop- 
ment of  the  eighties;  he  anticipated  the  South's  duty  and 
opportunity  by  seven  years.  His  mill  was  so  excellent  and 
complete,  he  was  so  able  an  advocate  of  manufactures  and 
his  public  attitude  was  so  constructive  that  his  venture  was 
really  "the  kindergarten  for  the  industry  in  the  up-country 
for  twenty  years."184 

182  William  Entwistle  and  T.  C.  Leak,  int.,  Rockingham,  N.  C, 
Aug.  14,  1920.  The  Holt  mills  in  Alamance  represent  distinctly  a 
family  development.  Gray's  apprenticeship  served  in  the  old  "  Pin- 
hook  Factory  "  has  been  remarked.  The  industry  at  Columbus  owes 
much  to  the  fact  that  before  and  during  the  war  the  place  was  "  a 
miniature  Lowell"  (Observer,  Raleigh,  Sept.  10,  1880).  The  Lawrence 
(1878)  and  enlarged  Woodlawn  (1880)  mills,  at  Lowell,  N.  C,  grew 
out  of  the  original  plant  of  the  company  built  in  1851  (Baltimore 
Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  June  3,  1882). 
Clifton  was  descended  from  the  older  Bivingsville  and  Glendale 
factories    (Blackman,   pp.    10-11;   William   Banks,   int.,   Columbia). 

183  \y.  J.  Thackston,  int.,  Greenville. 

184  "  The  miiis  built  in  this  locality  about  1880-1885  were  simply 
results  of  the  great  success  made  by  the  Piedmont  Manufacturing 
Company.  The  projectors  of  these  mills  used  no  arguments  differ- 
ent from  those  of  H.  P.  Hammett "  (James  D.  Hammett,  int.,  Ander- 
son, S.  C,  Sept.  11,  1916).  Pelzer  was  an  outgrowth  of  Piedmont, 
its  founder  driving  over  to  look  at  the  water  power  after  an  annual 
meeting  at  Piedmont  (W.  J.  Thackston,  int.,  Greenville).  Follow- 
ing Hammett,  Charlestonians  had  built  mills  in  the  Piedmont  dis- 


.. 


144  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE   SOUTH       [25O 

When  mills  were  erected  in  numbers,  experience  in  these 
was  shared  with  intending  projectors.  "In  the  Trenton 
mill  we  made  a  big  success.  It  got  into  the  papers,  and^I 
had  letters  from  all  over  the  country,  even  from  Texas, 
inquiring  about  it."185  It  seems  plain  that  "  the  success  of 
the  Salisbury  mill  built  the  Advance  mill.  A  good  many 
who  had  held  back  from  the  first  venture  went  into  the 
second."186 

Most  extensions  of  plants  were  of  course  outgrowths  of 
successful  experience.187 

Depressed  condition  of  agriculture  during  and  preceding 
the  early  eighties  was  in  a  large  way  a  cause  of  cotton 
manufacture.  Unremunerative  farming  led  to  industry  in 
two  main  ways:  by  putting  those  able  to  initiate  enterprise 
on  the  search  for  new  investments,  and  by  throwing  out  of 
a  livelihood  those  unable  to  make  new  opportunities  for 
themselves.  In  North  Carolina,  a  poor  agricultural  State 
anyway,  the  process  was  especially  clear.  Water  powers 
were  more  profitable  than  land.188  The  same  was  true  of 
the  upper  part  of  South  Carolina.  Before  the  war  there 
was  little  fertilizer  used,  and  this  district  could  not  grow 
cotton.  "  The  State  was  forced  to  appropriate  $5000  one 
year  to  enable  Spartanburg  County  to  meet  expenses. 
There  was  simply  not  enough  property  in  the  county  of 
value."189     This  agricultural  poverty  reflected  itself  in  a 

trict.  Explaining  the  causes  back  of  the  Charleston  Manufacturing 
Company,  one  of  its  incorporators  said :  "  We  thought  that  if  a  mill 
could  pay  in  the  up-country,  it  would  pay  to  build  a  mill  in  a  large 
center  like  Charleston "  (William  M.  Bird,  int.,  Charleston,  S.  C, 
Dec.  28,  1916).  And  speaking  of  this  enterprise,  a  local  paper 
urged :  "  Let  us  realize  that  what  is  good  for  Charleston  in  this 
respect,  is  better  for  us"  (Kershaw  Gazette,  quoted  in  News  and 
Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  31,  1881).  Cf.  ibid.,  Feb.  26,  1881,  regard- 
ing mills  at  Augusta. 

185  Q_  \v\  Ragan,  int.,  Gastonia. 

186  Theodore  F.  Klutz,  int.,  Salisbury.  "  The  Salisbury  mill  showed 
what  could  be  done  in  the  field"  (O.  D.  Davis,  int.,  Salisbury).  Cf. 
Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  Jan.  2,  1880,  editorial  "Atlanta's  New 
Year." 

187  Cf.  Charlotte  News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917,  respecting  Erwin  Cot- 
ton Mill  Company. 

188  John  Nichols,  int.,  Raleigh. 

189  J.  B.  Cleveland,  int.,  Spartanburg,  Cf.  Hammond,  p.  80. 


25l]]  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  145 

supply  of  surplus  labor  that  had  been  of  long  standing. 

Low  ebb  of  agriculture  was  inevitably  expressed  in  low 
price  of  cotton,  which  directly  and  indirectly  encouraged 
manufacture  of  the  staple.  Generally  speaking,  the  number 
of  mills  erected  has  varied  inversely  with  the  price  of  the 
raw  material.190 

Just  before  the  war  a  bale  of  cotton  was  worth  $40  to 
$50,  and  the  cost  of  constructing  an  average  spinning  and 
weaving  mill  was  $16  to  $20  per  spindle.  With  war,  paper 
money  and  scarcity  of  cotton,  the  value  of  the  bale  went  to 
$900,  and  soon  afterwards  mills  were  costing  $30  to  $40  per 
spindle.  By  1880  cotton  and  mill  construction  had  returned 
to  the  i860  levels.191 

With  crops  constantly  larger,  it  was  seen  that  the  South 
had  reached  the  maximum  quantity  of  cotton  that  could  be 
produced  profitably  until  world  demand  increased,192  and 
that  American  manufacturers  needd  to  expand  and  extend 
their  export  trade.193  "  For  a  few  years  after  the  war, 
when  the  price  of  cotton  was  so  high  that  anyone  could 
live  by  a  small  amount  of  farming,  the  land  was  cultivated 
extensively;  but  when  the  cultivation  reached  its  limit,  and 
the  price  of  cotton  became  lower,  the  farmers  and  home 
capitalists  realized  that  the  only  way  their  condition  could 

190  "  Low  cotton  meant  an  increase  in  the  number  of  failed  white 
farmers.  This  meant  an  enlarged  labor  supply.  Low  cotton  also 
increased  the  feeling  in  the  community  that  the  town  should  be  kept 
going  by  something  else  than  bankrupt  cotton  farmers  "  (W.  W. 
Ball,  int..  Columbia,  Jan.  3,  1917).  Cf.  Columbia  Record,  Textile 
Ed.,  1916,  regarding  Oakland  Mills. 

191 U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1880,  "  Cotton  Manufacture," 
by  Edward  Atkinson,  p.  8.  The  average  annual  price  for  middling 
upland  cotton  at  New  York,  gold  value,  was  30.76  cents  in  1865- 
1866,  and  fell,  with  irregular  recoveries,  to  11.24  in  1880-1881. 
Though  bales  were  increasingly  heavier,  production  of  bales  trebled 
in  these  years  (cf.  table  from  Bradstreet's,  quoted  in  Baltimore  Jour- 
nal of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Nov.  4,  1882).  As  to 
alleged  serious  turning  to  manufactures  in  the  South  consequent 
upon  low  prices  of  cotton  from  1830-1844,  see  Brooks,  pp.  148-149; 
on  the  increase  of  spindles  in  the  country  in  the  twenties,  similarly 
caused,  see  Hammond,  p.  246. 

192  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
Nov.  4,  1882. 

193  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Sept.  12,  1881.  Cf.  Observer, 
Raleigh,  June  12,  24;  Aug.  3,  14,  1880. 

10 


I46  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        ^252 

be   bettered   was   by   manufacturing   the   raw   product   at 
home/'184 

Not  only  were  cotton  manufactures  made  a  likely  field  of 
investment  by  low  price  of  material  through  increased  pro- 
duction, but  mills  rose  with  the  wave  of  recuperation  of 
business  after  the  panic  of  1873  and  its  following  years  of 
depression.  Return  to  specie  payments  lent  assurance,  and 
the  demand  for  cotton  goods  was  brisk.  The  year  1880 
opened  very  hopefully.195  The  testimony  of  the  president 
of  Graniteville  was  matched  by  that  of  South  Carolina 
manufacturers    generally :    "  We    have  .  .  .  been    running 

194  See  Tompkins,  History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  i,  pp.  181-182. 
Another  writer  "  remembers  seeing  five  bales  of  cotton  bring  the 
owner  only  $104.  Then  the  cry  went  up,  '  Take  the  mills  to  the  cot- 
ton fields,'  and  the  people  from  the  farms  flocked  to  tend  the  ma- 
chinery" (L.  P.  Hollis,  in  Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  1916).  Cf. 
Brooks,  p.  203  ff.  An  old  ledger  of  the  Sibley  mill  at  Augusta  con- 
tains memoranda  of  cotton  bought  at  4  cents  a  pound.  For  the 
benefits  conferred  on  the  cotton  farmer,  see  an  illustrative  but  not 
quite  accurate  statement  in  Tompkins,  "  Marketing  Cotton,"  in  Tex- 
tile World  Record,  Boston,  Sept.,  1908.     Cf.  Sioussat,  p.  228. 

195  por  the  country  it  was  said  that  "  following  the  resumption  of 
specie  payments,  which  inspired  confidence  on  all  sides,  and  after 
the  last  of  the  United  States  called  bonds  matured  .  .  .  and  when 
the  out-turn  of  the  harvest  was  pretty  well  ascertained,  the  whole 
scene  changed :  gold  began  to  pour  into  the  country,  business  in- 
creased with  wonderful  rapidity,  prices  of  bonds,  stocks  and  mer- 
chandise advanced  by  jumps,  and  the  whole  field  of  commercial 
and  financial  transactions  was  marked  by  a  great  rebound  from 
former  depression,  which  will  be  remembered  ...  as  the  great 
'  boom '  of  the  Fall  of  1879.  In  1877  the  country  appeared  as  an 
insolvent  debtor  .  .  . ;  in  October,  1879,  it  appeared  as  the  same 
party  with  every  matured  obligation  paid  up  in  full,  and  with  abun- 
dant capital  in  hand,  rousing  himself  to  engage  in  a  new  career  of 
industrial  prosperity"  (Commercial  and  Financial  Chronicle,  Jan. 
10,  1880).  Cf.  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers' 
Record,  Sept.  9,  1882.  For  the  South  it  was  stated :  "  The  year  that 
is  just  finished  will  be  to  the  present  generation  a  red-letter  one; 
for  it  brought  to  an  end  the  long  and  weary  period  of  enforced 
economy  and  restricted  business  that  followed  the  panic  of  1873, 
and  put  every  branch  of  industry  at  work.  Agriculture  was  encour- 
aged in  the  west  and  south  .  .  .  the  factories  received  more  orders 
than  they  could  fill,  the  railroads  were  blocked  with  freight,  the 
mines  were  pushed  to  a  greater  extent  than  ever,  and  all  other  in- 
terests were  quickened  towards  the  end  of  the  old  year  in  a  way 
that  was  full  of  promise"  (Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  Jan.  7,  1880). 
Cf.  Observer,  Raleigh,  Jan.  2,  8,  15,  April  24;  Daily  Dispatch,  Rich- 
mond, Jan.  1,  1880;  for  a  similar  statement  for  1882,  cf.  Manufac- 
turers' Record,  Baltimore,  Dec.  7,  1882. 


253]  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLs  147 

since  1873  between  two  fires,  but  we  seem  to  have  emerged 
from  that  trouble  now,  and  we  are  at  present  making  hand- 
some profits.  If  this  condition  of  affairs  continues  for  five 
years  ...  we  will  make  a  heap  of  money.  Everything  has 
conspired  during  the  last  twelve  months  to  help  this  coun- 
try."196 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  say  that  expectation  of  profits 
stimulated  the  erection  of  mills.  While  always  considered, 
the  prospect  of  money  gain  in  dividends  was  not  always 
most  important  in  the  minds  of  factory  builders.  Some- 
times projectors  were  able  to  estimate  from  proven  expe- 
rience of  mills  running  in  the  South,  but  more  often  profits 
were  argued  from  believed  advantages  of  the  section  for 
textile  manufacture.  Most  advocates  shared  their  hopes 
openly  with  community  or  State;  few  followed  a  course  of 
communicating  a  secret  to  hand-picked  investors.  Profits 
realized  in  these  years  will  be  discussed  in  a  later  chapter. 
Dividends  of  mills  were  regularly  brought  to  public  atten- 
tion and  calculations  were  printed  to  show  how  any  prop- 
erly managed  mill  could  make  money.197  The  demand  for 
goods  in  1880  allowed  sale  ahead  at  value;  prices  of  product 
advanced  faster  in  proportion  than  those  of  raw  material; 
mills  could  not  fill  their  orders ;  some  Southern  factories 
ran  day  and  night.  All  of  this  tended  to  draw  the  attention 
of  the  North  and  of  the  world  to  Southern  mills,  helped  up 
their  standards,  enlarged  their  outlook,  gave  established  and 
prospective  plants  a  springboard  for  the  great  impending 
leap  forward.198     Charleston,  the  only  lending  community 

196  See  Blackman,  pp.  4-5 ;  cf.  ibid.,  p.  10.  Some  foresaw  New 
England  seizing  fine  goods  manufacture  from  England  to  protect 
itself  against  Southern  coarse  product,  but  ultimately  surrendering 
the  whole  industry  more  and  more  to  the  factories  in  the  fields 
(ibid.,  p.  14,  and  leading  article).  Hammett  was  resolutely  hopeful 
when  leaner  times  began  to  be  feared  (cf.  Daily  Constitution,  At- 
lanta, quoted  in  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Feb.  1,  1883). 
As  to  gain  of  American  exports  to  China  at  the  expense  of  English 
mills,  cf.  Observer,  Raleigh,  Feb.  14,  June  19,  July  25,  1880. 

197  Cf.  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Sept.  13,  1881 ;  Observer, 
Raleigh,  Aug.  26,  1880;  Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  March  18,  1880. 

198  Cf.  Baltimore  Sun,  Jan.  8,  20,  28;  Observer,  Raleigh,  March  6, 
April  24,  1880;  Blackman,  p.  15.    By  the  end  of  1884  less  favorable 


I48  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [254 

in  South  Carolina,  putting  money  in  mills  at  a  distance, 
showed  more  investment  primarily  for  profit  than  did  local 
districts. 

In  some  instances,  ten  years  and  more  after  the  cotton 
manufacturing  development  commenced,  mills  were  estab- 
lished partly  to  take  advantage  of  cheap  labor.  This  motive 
of  exploitation  was  very  different  from  the  earlier  desire  to 
give  the  people  supporting  employment.  It  has  been  pointed 
out  that  there  is  a  distinction  between  arguments  used  in  pro- 
moting factories  and  the  factors  which  have  contributed  to 
the  success  of  the  industry.  When  commentators  on  the 
mills  say  that  their  rise  has  been  chiefly  due  to  inexpensive 
labor,  it  is  usually  meant  that  this  has  turned  out  to  be  their 
chief  asset.199  In  estimating  the  influence  of  water  powers 
in  mill  building  it  must  be  remembered  that  while  repre- 
sentative plants  were  located  on  streams  right  at  first,  there 
came  a  time  when  communities  without  this  facility  wanted 
factories  and  utilized  steam.  So  far  as  they  go,  statements 
explaining  the  causal  character  of  water  powers  are  proper. 
The  industry  at  Augiista  and  Columbus  prior  to  1880  was 
attributable  chiefly  to  falls  in  the  Chattahoochee  and  Savan- 
nah rivers,  and  plants  erected  after  this  date  owed  much  to 
the  presence  of  this  asset.200 

conditions  were  at  hand,  but  the  Southern  industry  had  received  its 
impetus  by  this  time. 

199  Cf.  Copeland,  pp.  143-144;  Murphy,  p.  103;  and  the  writer's 
"End  of  Child  Labor,"  in  Survey,  Aug.  23,  1919.  Of  course,  pro- 
posals by  Northerners  to  erect  factories  in  the  South  considered 
from  the  outset  the  advantage  in,  not  any  advantage  to,  labor.  Cf. 
Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Feb.  1,  1883;  Baltimore  Journal 
of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  July  15,  1882. 

200  Cf.  ibid.,  Sept.  9,  1882,  as  to  Columbus ;  Manufacturers'  Record, 
Baltimore,  Jan.  4,  1883,  as  to  Augusta.  When  it  is  said  that  "  With- 
out the  canal  Columbia  would  have  had  no  mills"  (Washington 
Clark,  int.,  Columbia,  Jan.  I,  1917),  correction  must  be  inserted  that 
without  the  desire  for  mills  there  would  have  been  no  canal;  it  was 
constructed  in  the  main  after  1880.  Communities  wishing  outside 
assistance  frequently  advertised  their  water  powers  (cf.  News  and 
Courier,  Charleston,  Aug.  17,  1880,  assets  of  Oconee  County).  Com- 
paratively late  in  the  development,  as  in  the  case  of  labor,  exploita- 
tion of  water  powers  came  to  a  leading  place.  Cf.  Charlotte  News, 
Textile  Ed.,  1917,  regarding  Roanoke  Rapids ;  Columbia  Record, 
ibid.,  1916,  regarding  Ware  Shoals.  Speaking  broadly,  railroads 
have  been   responsible   for  the  extension   of  the  industry  and  the 


255]  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLs  149 

Like  some  other  causes,  purpose  of  promoters  to  provide 
themselves  with  salaries  did  not  appear  in  the  'beginning. 
Later,  the  practice  is  said  to  have  been  common,  applying 
particularly  to  extensions  with  accompanying  salary  in- 
creases, or  to  projection  of  plants  in  new  communities  by  an 
established  manufacturer  who  wished  money  to  come  prin- 
cipally from  local  investors.  The  man  who  subscribed 
heavily  to  make  positions  for  himself  and  members  of  his 
family  had  little  in  common  with  the  founders  of  the  South- 
ern industry.201 

A  few  mills  were  started  because  of  desire  to  use  idle 
land  and  buildings.  Commencement  of  manufacturing  in 
thlTbuilding  of  the  Atlanta  Exposition  is  a  case  in  point.202 
Mills  were  regularly  erected  to  help  stagnant  towns;  it  was 
exceedingly  rare  that  one  was  proposed  to  create  a  town 
or  to  benefit  land  speculation.203 

Exemption  of  factories  or  of  new  machinery  from  State 
or  local  taxation  made  more  appeal  to  the  investor  as  such 
than  to  promoters  and  shareholders  participating  in  com- 
munity enterprises ;  it  was  believed  to  encourage  assistance 
from  the  North  and  counted  with  Southern  founders  who 
owned  most  of  the  stock  in  their  ventures.204 

From  time  to  time  reference  has  been  made  to  reported 

location  of  plants  rather  than  for  the  inception  of  mills   (cf.  Co- 
lumbia Record,  Textile  Ed.,  1916,  regarding  Glenn-Lowry  mill). 

201  A.  N.  Wood,  Gaffney,  Sept.  13 ;  Clement  F.  Haynsworth, 
Greenville,  Sept.  9,  1916;  August  Kohn,  Columbia,  S.  C,  Jan.  5, 
1917,  interviews. 

202  See  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  14,  1882.  The  Arista 
mill'  at  Winston-Salem  put_  idle  land  in  use  (John  W.  Fries,  int., 
Winston-Salem).  Cf.  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manu- 
facturers' Record,  Nov.  11,  1882,  as  to  a  project  at  Gainesville,  Ga. 
When  the  development  was  well  begun,  plants  of  various  sorts  were 
converted  for  cotton  manufacture. 

203  The  case  of  the  Region  of  the  Savannah  Colonization  Assn.  is 
noticed  elsewhere.  Bessemer  City,  North  Carolina,  was  an  in- 
stance (S.  N.  Boyce  and  J.  Lee  Robinson,  int.,  Gastonia,  N.  C,  Sept. 
14,  1916). 

204  Cf.  quotation  from  Bradstreet's  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Com- 
merce and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Nov.  4,  1882;  Observer,  Raleigh, 
Feb.  13,  1880;  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  p.  282; 
Blackman,  pp.  6-7 ;  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Dec.  7,  1882 ; 
Baltimore  Sun,  March  4,  1880;  News  and  Observer,  Raleigh,  Nov, 
2,  1880;  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  pp.  99,  101. 


150  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN   THE    SOUTH        £256 

intent  of  English  enterprisers  to  exploit  Southern  cotton 
manufacturing  facilities.  An  Englishman  who,  from  being 
an  operative  in  Lancashire,  Massachusetts,  and  South  Caro- 
lina, has  become  important  in  the  Southern  industry,  said 
that  while  there  has  always  been  much  talk  of  this,  nothing 
ever  resulted.205  As  will  be  seen  in  another  chapter,  North- 
ern participation  was  principally  by  commission  and  ma- 
chinery firms  and  through  investment.  Before  the  cotton 
mill  era  properly  opened  some  Northern  manufacturers 
came  to  the  South,  and  after  the  movement  had  demon- 
strated its  success  New  England  companies  opened  branch 
plants.206 

It  is  said  that  in  Lancashire  machinery  manufacturers, 
commission  houses  and  supply  men  have  established  mills 
with  speculative  purpose.207  Equipment  firms  may  even 
teach  operatives  in  English  and  Japanese  mills  to  run  the 
machinery.  Dull  times  in  the  American  textile  machinery 
manufacture  have  prompted  makers  to  encourage  erection 
and  enlargement  of  factories  by  several  means.208  It  is 
doubtful  whether  their  motive  in  this  policy  followed  in  the 
South  has  been  in  any  large  degree  speculative.  It  was  not 
such  in  the  eighties ;  their  desire  was  to  profit  from  sale  of 
machinery,  not  from  sale  of  stock  taken  in  payment  for 
machinery.     They  furnished  a  facility  rather  than  supply- 


205  William  Entwistle,  int.,  Rockingham. 

206  George  Putnam,  a  member  of  a  commission  firm  in  Boston, 
established  Camperdown  at  Greenville  in  1873;  through  its  example 
this  mill  had  some  influence,  and,  with  Batesville,  taken  over  by 
Putnam  in  1879,  had  only  Northern  capital  (Mrs.  M.  P.  Gridley, 
int.,  Greenville,  S.  C,  Sept.  9,  1916).  Converse  came  from  New 
England  to  join  the  Confederate  forces  and  was  assigned  to  opera- 
tion of  the  Glendale  Factory;  after  the  war,  he  continued  to  manage 
the  mill,  and  conceived  the  idea  of  the  influential  Clifton  enterprise 
(J.  A.  Chapman,  int.,  Spartanburg,  S.  C,  Sept.  5,  1916).  Makepeace 
and  Entwistle  are  other  cases  in  point  (A.  A.  Thompson,  int., 
Raleigh).  It  is  proper,  also,  to  consider  the  services  of  A.  D.  Lock- 
wood,  mill  engineer  of  Providence,  who  was  employed  by  enter- 
prises at  the  opening  of  the  period.  Cf.  Clark,  in  South  in  Building 
of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  pp.  264-265. 

207  Copeland,  pp.  317-318. 
a°8J.  L.  Hartsell,  int.,  Concord. 


2573  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLS  I5I 

ing  an  impulse.209  Tompkins,  as  mill  engineer,  as  head  of 
a  repair  and  supply  firm  and  as  Southern  agent  of  machin- 
ery manufacturers,  was  instrumental  in  building  many  fac- 
tories, but  he  was  motivated  by  desire  for  legitimate  profit 
and  by  public  spirit.210 

Following  the  war  much  new  machinery  was  installed  in 
New  England.  Southern  mills  with  more  than  a  local 
market,  many  of  them  overworked  during  the  war  and  run 
down  during  Reconstruction,  had  to  reequip  or  build  new 
plants.  This  circumstance  assisted  the  spirit  for  cotton 
manufactures.211 

These,  and  others,  were  reasons  why  the  industry  came 
into  being.  In  the  subsequent  chapters  on  Labor  and  on 
Capital  it  will  be  shown  how  the  South  carried  out  its  pur- 
pose. The  present  pages  deal  with  the  actual  rise  of  fac- 
tories and  aim  to  exhibit  attending  public  interest  as  it 
expressed  itself  in  the  "  Cotton  Mill  Campaign."  The 
movement,  it  has  been  seen,  had  a  definite  beginning  about 
1880.  The  whole  South  not  joining  in  right  at  first,  it  is 
difficult  to  say  when  the  "drive"  ended.  Certainly  by 
1895,  if  not  earlier,  it  had  been  demonstrated  that  the  in- 
dustry carried  its  own  excuse  for  being,  and  nothing  more 
than  economic  motives  were  necessary  to  its  encourage- 
ment.212 

209  It  is  charged,  however,  that  an  industrial  journal  represented 
machinery  manufacturers  in  more  than  simply  an  advertising 
capacity. 

210  He  would  foe  invited  to  speak  to  citizens  of  a  town  contemplat- 
ing erection  of  a  mill,  explaining  the  broad  benefits  the  factory 
would  bring  them  and  imparting  as  much  technical  information  as 
they  needed  for  organization  (Sterling  Graydon,  int.,  Charlotte). 
Cf.  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  p.  25  ff. ;  Plan  to 
Raise  Capital,  pp.  13-14. 

211  Henry  E.  Fries,  int.,  Winston-Salem. 

212  Better  argument  than  the  first  appearance  of  the  term  is  the 
clear  implication  of  the  News  and  Courier  that,  economically,  the 
Cotton  Mill  Campaign  began  with  1880.  It  was  said  that  Hammett 
ranked  as  one  of  the  pioneers  in  the  Southern  industry  because  his 
Piedmont  Factory  was  built  before  the  opening  of  the  Cotton  Mill 
Campaign,  and,  in  seconding  his  authoritative  judgment,  the  paper 
took  satisfaction  in  the  practical  undertaking  of  a  program  which  it 
had  long  urged,  and  exulted  that  "  seen  in  the  cold  light  of  accom- 
plished facts,  the  enthusiasm  of  which  some  of  our  friends  hav:e 


152  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN   THE    SOUTH        [258 

Hammett,  in  1883,  to  allay  discouragement  that  had 
arisen  in  some  quarters,  made  an  explanation  that  exhibits 
the  Cotton  Mill  Campaign:  "A  state  of  things  has  devel- 
oped which  many  of  us  expected  to  see,  and  which  was 
inevitable.  Too  many  yarn  mills  have  been  built  in  the  last 
two  or  three  years  all  over  the  South  from  Virginia  to 
Mexico,  and  as  a  consequence  the  market  for  coarse  yarn 
is  overstocked.  .  .  .  They  were  built  for  the  most  part  by 
inexperienced  'men,  taken  from  other  pursuits,  without  any 
experience  or  knowledge  of  the  business,  badly  built,  the 
cheapest  machinery  put  into  them,  with  no  scientific  system 
for  doing  the  work  intended,  many  of  them  without  suffi- 
cient capital  to  pay  for  them  when  they  were  completed."213 
It  is  plain  here  how  suddenly,  under  what  social  pressure, 
the  movement  was  born.  "  Once  the  opportunity  had  been 
presented  to  them  the  chance  was  eagerly  seized,  and  all 
who  were  able  to  do  so  contributed  to  make  the  new  enter- 
prise successful.  The  press  urged  it  upon  those  who  had 
capital  to  invest,  hailed  joyfully  every  manufacturing  proj- 
ect, and  made  much  of  every  successful  establishment.  .  .  . 
As  is  commonly  the  case  with  enterprises  of  this  nature,  it 
has  been  attended  with  not  a  little  public  excitement.    .    .    ,"214 

complained,  as  carrying  us  too  far,  has  not  taken  us  a  hair's  breadth 
beyond  the  confines  of  solid  business  truth"  (Aug.  1,  1881).  Cf. 
ibid.,  April  25,  1881.  Something  as  to  the  closing  date  may  be  drawn 
from  the  fact  that  in  1886  South  Carolina  repealed  an  act  exempting 
cotton  mills  from  taxation  (cf.  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Na- 
tion, vol.  vi,  p.  282). 

213  "  They  made  poor  yarn,  which  they  pledged  for  the  money  to 
operate  them,  which  was  of  course  sold  to  realize,  for  such  prices 
as  were  offered,  and  when  the  yarn  was  thus  slaughtered  it  made 
a  price  for  them  and  others  to  sell  by,  and  it  is  not  strange  that  they 
made  little  money."  Most  of  them  made  more,  however,  than 
Northern  mills  (quoted  from  Atlanta  Constitution,  in  Manufac- 
turers' Record,  Baltimore,  Feb.  1,  1883). 

214  " .  .  .  more  mills  have  been  projected  than  have  been  built; 
more  have  been  erected  which  their  projectors  would  not  have 
erected  had  they  studied  the  matter  carefully  before  entering  upon 
the  experiment.  But  the  failures  have  been  few,  and  upon  the  whole 
the  return  upon  investment  in  Southern  cotton  mills  has  exceeded 
that  upon  factories  in  the  North"  (see  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufac- 
tures, 1900,  "  Cotton  Manufacture,"  by  Edward  Stanwood,  pp.  28- 
29).  An  instructive  table  shows  that  Southern  spindles  increased 
from  610,000  in  1880  to  1,756,000  in  1890,  reached  more  than  2,000,000 


259]  THE  RISE  0F  THE  MILLs  153 

An  impressive  interpretation  of  the  English  industrial 
revolution  has  shown  that  while  it  began  through  invention, 
invention  alone  would  have  taken  generations  to  establish 
the  different  regime.  The  philosophy  of  Adam  Smith  and 
the  moral  impulses  imparted  by  the  Wesleys  and  Hannah 
More  joined  with  the  work  of  Watt  to  speed  the  process. 
"It  required  all  the  forms — physical,  mental,  commercial, 
and  philanthropical — working  in  separate  yet  convergent 
lines,  to  lay  the  foundation  of  an  entirely  new  system  of 
manufactures.  .  .  ."215  In  the  South  all  sorts  of  forces, 
imore  directly  and  consciously  applied  than  in  the  case  of 
England,  headed  up  in  the  Cotton  Mill  Campaign ;  regret 
for  the  past,  resolution  for  the  future,  expressed  them- 
selves here.  Economic  inertia  was  overcome  with  moral 
incitement,218  industrial  activity  was  lent  momentum  by  a 
"  passion  for  rehabilitation  "  which  made  erection  of  cotton 
mills,  as  twenty  years  later  of  schools,  "a  form  of  civic 
piety."217    Leaders  were  mindful  of  the  psychological  qual- 

by  1892  and  more  than  4,000,000  by  1900.  From  1880  to  1883,  450,000 
new  spindles  were  put  into  operation.  Taking  10,000  for  the  average- 
sized  mill,  this  means  that  three  years  saw  45  factories  opened 
(ibid.).  Cf.  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers' 
Record,  June  10,  1882,  introduction  to  column  headed  "  Manufac- 
turing." On  Aug.  26/  eight  items  out  of  thirty-six  dealing  with 
manufactures  were  about  cottori  mills ;  this  was  typical.  Cf .  ibid., 
Sept.  2,  9,  1882;  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Jan.  II,  Feb.  8, 
1883 ;  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  July  30,  1881 ;  Augusta  Trade 
Review,  Oct.,  1884;  Thompson,  p.  73.  "The  South  burst  into  the 
development;  mills  grew  up  like  mushrooms"  (Summerfield  Baldwin, 
Jr.,  int.,  Baltimore,  Md.,  Jan.  8,  1917). 

215  See  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1880,  Factory  System  of 
U.  S.,  pp.  4-5. 

216  Cf .  Ingle,  pp.  72-73. 

217  Cf.  Murphy,  pp.  17-18.  The  volitional  quality  of  the  campaign 
appears  in  contemporary  references  to  it  as  an  "  experiment."  Cf. 
Plunkett,  p.  170.  Industrial  advantage,  arguing  from  the  past, 
seemed  to  be  on  the  side  of  water  power;  the  wish  was  sometimes 
father  to  the  thought  in  reasonings  for  steam  power  to  be  used  at 
towns  not  on  streams  but  which  wanted  mills.  Cf.  News  and 
Courier,  Charleston,  March  26,  April  25,  29,  1881.  In  many  ways 
the  Cotton  Mill  Campaign  was  a  romantic  movement,  resulting  in 
spindles  instead  of  sonnets.  There  had  been  intense  public  interest 
in  the  Pacific  railway,  stretching  across  a  desert  to  guarantee  the 
Union's  integrity  (cf.  Dunning,  pp.  144-145).  The  South  felt  a 
homogeneity  in  making  cotton  mills  rise  from  an  industrial  wil- 
derness. 


154  THE   RISE   0F    COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        \j260 

ity  of  the  movement  and  were  jealous  that  it  should  have  no 
backsets.  "The  State  cannot  afford  a  single  failure  in  her 
cotton  mill  campaign  .  .  .  ,"218  said  one,  and  another:  "A 
few  disasters  amongst  new  mills  would  be  a  calamity,  the 
extent  and  effect  of  which  it  would  be  difficult  to  estimate 
or  realize,  for  while  one  successful  mill  inspires  confidence, 
the  failure  of  one  to  succeed  would  have  directly  the  oppo- 
site effect.  The  people  should  not  allow  themselves  to  be 
tarried  into  it  too  rapidly  by  popular  enthusiasm,  which 
now  prevails  to  some  extent  throughout  the  South.  .  .  ."219 

Few  episodes  are  more  illustrative  of  the  wholehearted- 
ness  and  wisdom  with  which  the  South  entered  upon  the 
Cotton  Mill  Campaign  than  that  of  the  Clement  Attach- 
ment. This  was  a  device  that  combined  ginning  and  spin- 
ning in  one  process ;  it  was  small,  cheap,  and  made  a  limited 
amount  of  yarn.  Recommended  for  the  use  of  planters,  its 
employment  would  represent  the  first  step  from  agricul- 
ture into  industry.  When  Southerners  were  beginning  to 
think  of  cotton  manufacturing  there  was  eager,  widespread 
inquiry  as  to  this  equipment,  and  it  was  put  into  operation 
in  some  places.  But  it  was  not  tarried  over  long — it  was 
recognized  as  a  makeshift,  a  partial  solution  which  did  not 
satisfy  the  purpose  for  a  real  industrial  development.220 

The  spirit  of  the  movement  for  factories  may  best  be 

218  "  Enquirer,"  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  April  29,  1881. 

219  Hammett,  in  ibid.,  Aug.  1,  1881. 

220  An  enthusiastic  forecast  missed  fire  in  asserting  "  we  shall 
have  in  a  half  century  some  scribbling  journalist  of  the  future  writ- 
ing the  gossips  of  the  invention  of  the  Clement  Attachment — which 
will  by  that  time  have  worked  greater  revolutions  in  the  South  than 
the  cotton  gin  has  done  in  the  past  half  century!"  (Daily  Constitu- 
tion, Atlanta,  Feb.  6,  1880).  Cf.  ibid.,  Jan.  2,  Feb.  20,  1880.  Black- 
man  solicited  many  opinions  about  it,  and  received  generally  unfa- 
vorable replies ;  cf.  especially  pp.  17-18,  showing  to  what  pains  enter- 
prisers from  all  parts  of  the  South  went  to  examine  the  machine ; 
cf.  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb.  26,  May  26,  1881 ;  Observer, 
Raleigh,  Jan.  31,  1880.  Nor  was  the  South,  when  the  Cotton  Mill 
Campaign  began  to  gather  momentum,  greatly  regardful  of  outside 
comment;  answerable  to  the  faith  that  was  in  them,  papers  printed 
onlookers'  discouraging  and  heartening  references  with  like  com- 
posure. Cf.  letter  of  Robert  P.  Parker  to  New  York  Sun,  quoted  in 
Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  Feb.  13,  1880,  and  quotation  of  Detroit 
Free  Press  in  Observer,  Raleigh,  Aug.  31,  1880. 


26 1 J  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  155 

caught  in  newspaper  items.  These  appeared  constantly  and 
in  numbers,  in  county  and  city  papers,  and  there  was  a  lively 
exchange  of  such  information  between  publications.  Any 
news  bearing  upon  industry,  particularly  cotton  manu- 
facture, was  put  to  service.  The  following  is  a  character- 
istic heading :  "  The  Straws  that  Show  !  Indications  of  the 
Way  the  Wind  is  Blowing.  The  Latest  Movements  in  the 
Cotton-Mill  Campaign."  And  there  follow  notices  of  the 
receipt  of  machinery  by  Clifton  /mill  and  praise  from  Bos- 
ton of  the  efficiency  and  profitableness  of  factories  at  Co- 
lumbus.221 Correspondence  from  a  little  place  since  become 
a  manufacturing  point  of  consequence  gave  a  typical  in- 
stance :  "  In  conclusion  let  me  say  a  few  words  in  regard  to 
the  '  Pet '  of  the  town,  the  Rock  Hill  Cotton  Factory.  This 
factory  is  owned  and  controlled  by  the  citizens  of  the  town 
(except  $15,000  in  stock  owned  in  Charleston).  It  has  a 
capital  of  $100,000,  has  over  6,000  spindles  with  1,500  more 
to  be  added  in  a  few  days.  The  best  evidence  of  its  success 
is  that  not  one  dollar  of  its  stock  can  be  bought.  It  is  the 
intention  of  the  company  ...  to  run  the  factory  day  and 
night  ...  to  keep  up  with  its  orders."222  It  was  reported 
that  "strenuous  efforts  are  being  made  in  Greensboro  to 
establish  a  cotton  factory  in  that  city."223  In  an  article  on 
railroads  occurred  this  paragraph :  "  It  is  rumored  that  the 
Columbia  and  Greenville  railroad  car  shops  at  Helena  will 
be  removed  to  Columbia.  ...  In  case  the  removal  is  made 

221  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March  22,  1881. 

222  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  12,  1882.  News  of  mills 
from  a  distance,  too,  was  frequent ;  it  was  noticed  that  enterprises 
at  Wesson,  Miss.,  were  paying  handsomely,  that  a  mill  building  was 
constructing  at  Natchez,  that  companies  were  organizing  at  Vicksburg 
and  New  Orleans ;  when  a  mill  at  Nashville  declared  a  14  per  cent 
dividend  another  was  built;  mills  at  Pulaski,  Tenn.,  were  anxious 
to  double  their  capacity;  $50,000  was  subscribed  for  a  plant  at  Jack- 
son, Tenn.;  Dallas  was  starting  a  $200,000  factory  and  Sherman 
wanted  a  $75,000  mill  (ibid.,  Aug.  12,  1881). 

223  Winston  Leader,  quoted  in  Observer,  Raleigh,  June  17,  1880. 
"  The  Statesville  Landmark,  with  its  characteristic  level-headedness, 
calls  for  the  building  of  manufactures.  With  this  would  come  com- 
mercial strength  for  our  beloved  South"  (News  and  Observer, 
Raleigh,  Dec.  12,  1880) 


I56  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [262 

the  Newberry  News  suggests  that  the  buildings  at  Helena 
might  be  easily  converted  into  a  cotton  factory."224 

It  was  reported  that  "  the  '  Cotton  Mill  Campaign '  is 
progressing  satisfactorily  in  Yorkville.  We  heard  an  old 
citizen  remark  some  days  ago  that  he  had  never  seen  the 
town  so  thoroughly  aroused  and  united.  .  .  .  Yorkville  to 
all  appearances  is  moving  forward  with  a  determined  pur- 
pose to  put  into  successful  operation  a  cotton  mill.  .  .  . 
The  shares  have  been  placed  at  $500  each,  and  up  to  this 
writing  about  $25,000  have  been  subscribed.  I  would  state 
that  this  amount  has  been  raised  within  the  limits  of  the 
town."225  It  was  advertised  that  "  We  will  give  to  a  Cotton 
Manufacturing  Company  that  will  organize  and  locate  at 
Landsford,  S.  C,  with  a  capital  of  $300,000,  a  site,  20  acres 
of  land  and  300  horse  water  power."226  There  were  many 
items  like  the  following :  "  The  project  for  establishing  a 
manufactory  for  cotton  near  Walhalla  is  being  mooted. 
An  informal  meeting  of  some  of  the  citizens  of  that  place 
was  held  last  week  with  this  view  and  stock  to  the  amount 
of  nearly  $10,000  was  subscribed  by  the  few  present.  It 
is  believed  strongly  that  as  much  as  $25,000  will  be  sub- 
scribed in  that  neighborhood,  and  if  the  people  of  the  county 
will  join  in  the  enterprise  as  much  as  $50,000  might  be  made 
available."227 

Town  pride  expressed  itself  in  keen  rivalry.  "  One  little 
place  would  have  a  mill,  and  its  neighbors  would  say  :  '  Here, 

224  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March  22,  1881. 

225  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March  25,  1881.  "  The  signers 
to  the  prospectus  of  the  mill  are  among  the  most  reliable  and  respon- 
sible men  in  York  County"  (ibid.,  March  31,  1881). 

226  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb.  23,  1881.  "  One  gentleman 
at  Griffin,  Ga.,  offers  to  subscribe  one-fourth  the  amount  necessary 
to  build  a  cotton  factory"  (ibid.,  March  25,  1881). 

227  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb.  26,  1881,  Cf.  ibid.,  Jan. 
9,  1882,  as  to  Fort  Mill.  From  Marion  came  this  notice :  "  Our 
wants:  A  bank,  an  academy,  a  cotton  factory,  a  comfortable  room 
for  passengers  at  the  depot,  an  iron  foundry  .  .  ."  (ibid.,  Feb.  22, 
1881).  "There  is  not  a  cotton  factory  at  Raleigh,  but  there  are  not 
less  than  five  large  planing  mills,  two  foundries,  two  boiler  fac- 
tories .  .  .  ,"  and  newspapers  and  schools  are  mentioned  (ibid.,  Jan. 
26,  1881).  Cf.  as  to  Henderson,  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce 
and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Oct.  14,  1882. 


263]  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  157 

we  can't  let  that  town  get  ahead  of  us.  We  must  start  a 
cotton  mill.'"228  "If  Belton  got  a  mill,  Williamston  would 
want  one.  The  townspeople  would  go  to  their  leading  citi- 
zen. It  made  no  difference  what  a  man  was,  so  long  as  he 
was  the  leading  citizen  he  had  to  become  a  mill  presi- 
dent."229 

It  has  been  said  that  the  Charleston  Manufacturing  Com- 
pany, in  all  but  its  ill  success,  was  the  type  enterprise  of  the 
Cotton  Mill  Campaign.  It  was  peculiarly  the  child  of  the 
slogan,  "  Bring  the  Mills  to  the  Cotton."230  Though  never 
really  prospering  itself,  this  factory  had  much  to  do  with 
encouraging  others,  not  least  because  it  showed  that  the  city 
practiced  what  it  preached.231     In  Charleston  every  detail 

228  Henry  E.  Litchford,  int.,  Richmond,  Va.,  Aug.  29,  1916. 

229  Benjamin  Gossett,  int.,  Anderson,  S.  C,  Sept.  11,  1916.  A  pro- 
moter, by  visiting  other  mills,  assured  himself  of  the  profitableness 
of  an  enterprise  in  his  town:  "Will  a  mill  pay  in  Sumter?  Why 
not?  Every  mill  I  visited  had  to  pay  $2  per  cord  for  wood — it  will 
cost  less  here  in  Sumter.  .  .  .  Every  one  of  the  mills  received  their 
cotton  in  bales  ...  at  a  loss  of  $1.90  to  $2  per  bale  on  bagging  and 
ties.  A  factory  in  Sumter  can  use  at  least  one-third  of  cotton  with- 
out being  packed  .  .  ."  (quoted  from  Sumter  Southron,  in  News 
and  Courier,  Charleston,  March  31,  1881).  Many  out  of  the  way 
places  came  into  notice  through  erection  of  cotton  mills  that  would 
never  otherwise  have  been  heard  of ;  ventures  in  every  part  of  the 
South,  small  and  large,  visionary  or  likely  to  mature,  were  not  only 
chronicled,  but  were  watched  in  their  development  from  week  to 
week.  Interesting  references,  similar  to  those  given  already,  may  be 
found  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  4,  6,  21,  26,  Feb.  3,  24, 
26,  March  23,  April  6,  May  21,  Sept.  1,  Oct.  21,  1881 ;  Deutsche 
Zeitung,  Charleston,  Feb.  28,  1881 ;  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce 
and  Manufacturers'  Record,  June  3,  Aug.  26,  Sept.  2,  23,  30,  Nov. 
18,  1882;  Observer,  Raleigh,  Jan.  2,  Feb.  20,  1880;  News  and  Ob- 
server, Raleigh,  March  18,  Sept.  15,  18,  Oct.  12,  Dec.  24,  1800;  Balti- 
more Sun,  Jan.  20,  1880. 

230  Little  memorandum  books  informally  kept  by  officers  of  the 
company  covering  organization,  building  and  operation,  show  with 
what  inexperience  and  yet  with  what  genuinely  affectionate  solicitude 
this  project  was  undertaken  and  followed  through  the  seven  years 
of  its  luckless  career.  A  flyleaf  gives :  "  Facts  &  Figures  relating  to 
the  Charleston  Mfg.  Co.  Born  March,  1881 ;  died  Feby.,  1888,  leav- 
ing a  large  circle  of  disconsolate  stockholders  to  mourn  their  loss. 
'  Requiescat  in  Pace,'  "  and  there  is  the  significant  addition  :  " '  Bring 
the  Mills  to  the  Cotton.' — News  and  Courier"  (Punctuation  is  the 
writer's).    Dawson,  editor  of  the  paper,  was  one  of  the  incorporators. 

231 "  Charleston  is  in  a  fair  way  to  have  two  large  cotton  factories 
in  a  short  while.  .  .  .  Camden  is  preparing  for  a  cotton  factory. 
Hodges  ...  is   preparing  for  a  cotton  factory.     Rock  Hill  has   a 


I58  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS    IN    THE    SOUTH        [264 

of  the  taking  of  subscriptions  and  of  erection  of  the  plant 
was  watched  with  the  most  absorbed  interest.232 

The  speed  with  which  companies  were  organized  and 
plants  erected  was  significant  of  impatience  to  be  at  the  task 
that  invited.  The  company  that  erected  the  Huguenot  Mill 
at  Greenville  formed  February  10,  1881 ;  a  charter  was  ob- 
tained March  13 ;  a  lot  was  bought  in  the  heart  of  the  city 
and  the  first  brick  was  laid  March  23,  the  last  June  2 ;  by 
July  22  the  machinery  was  in  place  and  the  mill  was  weav- 
ing cloth.233 

At  the  same  time  that  new  enterprises  outright  were 
being  undertaken,  old  mills  were  being  greatly  enlarged  or 

cotton  factory.  Greenville  has  several  cotton  factories.  Newberry, 
the  best  location  for  a  factory  in  the  State,  and  the  place  most  need- 
ing one,  is  not  preparing  for  a  cotton  factory,  and  there  is  no  pres- 
ent likelihood  that  she  ever  will.  .  .  .  There  are  numbers  of  people 
ready  to  aid  in  the  enterprise  .  .  .  but  there  is  nobody  to  take  the 
lead"  (Newberry  Herald,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston, 
Feb.  8,  1881).  It  was  not  long  before  a  citizen  of  Newberry  did 
take  the  lead  in  erecting  a  cotton  mill.  "  Why  does  not  Fairfield 
make  the  experiment?  It  is  said  that  fifteen  thousand  dollars  will 
set  in  motion  over  five  hundred  spindles,  and  continual  additions 
can  be  made.  .  .  .  The  way  to  begin  the  new  era  is  to  erect  a  small 
factory  in  every  county,  and  then  to  improve  as  facilities  increase. 
Imagine  Fairfield  converting  her  eighteen  or  twenty  thousand  bales 
of  cotton  into  yarn  or  cloth  each  year,  and  realizing  a  double  price. 
If  we  can  do  no  better  let  us  spin  a  hundred  bales  at  first.  .  .  .  Shall 
the  effort  be  made,  or  shall  other  counties,  once  far  behind  us  in 
wealth,  take  the  lead  and  rapidly  outstrip  us?"  (Winnsboro  News, 
quoted  in  ibid.).  The  Barnwell  Sentinel  approved  Charleston's 
course,  and  the  Keowee  Courier  said  Charleston  had  set  the  entire 
state  an  example  (ibid.). 

232  Cf.  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb.  1,  March  16,  28,  April 
9,  July  6,  Sept.  2,  1881 ;  Jan.  14,  1882;  Deutsche  Zeitung,  Charleston, 
March  21,  1881.  At  the  same  time  a  movement  among  German  citi- 
zens of  Charleston  to  establish  a  cotton  mill  with  $100,000  capitali- 
zation got  as  far  as  application  for  a  charter,  but  apparently  no 
farther.  Cf.  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  27,  March  30,  May 
4,  23,  1881,  Deutsche  Zeitung,  Charleston,  March  31,  April  21,  1881. 

233  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
Oct.  28,  1882.  "  Inside  of  four  months  from  the  commencement  of 
the  building,  the  mill  was  in  operation  and  the  capital  invested  yield- 
ing returns  to  its  owners."  A  mill  at  Rome,  Ga.,  the  cornerstone 
of  which  was  laid  in  June,  was  to  be  in  operation  in  November 
(ibid.,  June  17,  1882).  From  the  organization  of  Pelzer  to  com- 
pletion of  the  initial  plant,  including  development  of  the  water 
power  for  two  later  factories,  required  fourteen  months  (E.  A. 
Smyth,  int.,  Greenville,  Sept.  12,  1916).  Cf.  News  and  Courier, 
Charleston,  March  25,  May  18,  Sept.  10,  1881. 


265]  THE   RISE   OF   THE    MILLS  159 

equipped  with  new  machinery,  plants  were  changing  hands, 
those  that  chanced  to  burn  were  promptly  rebuilt,  factory 
projects  that  had  lapsed  were  revived  and  pushed  to  com- 
pletion, buildings  were  converted  from  other  uses  to  be 
cotton  manufactories,  places  which  had  previously  had  mills 
reestablished  them.  Low  prices  brought  by  some  factories 
early  in  1880  contrasted  with  the  profitableness  of  the  in- 
dustry a  few  months  later  and  indicate  how  suddenly  cotton 
manufacturing  burst  upon  the  South ;  small  ventures  which 
had  had  a  chequered  career,  doing  a  small  business  and  fre- 
quently failing,  were  taken  by  progressive  managements 
that  made  them  over  and  put  new  life  into  them.234 

234  Cf.  Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  Jan.  20,  Feb.  29,  1880;  Balti- 
more Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  July  15, 
Sept.  16,  1882;  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb.  18,  March  4, 
Aug.  19,  Dec.  14,  1881 ;  Augusta  Trade  Review,  Oct.,  1884 ;  Kohn 
and  Berry,  Descriptive  Sketch  of  Orangeburg,  1888,  p.  12. 


CHAPTER  III 

The  Labor  Factor 

The  story  of  the  rise  of  cotton  mills  in  the  South  is  a 
human  story.  Loyalty,  love,  purpose,  charity,  hope  and 
faith  are  so  intertwined  with  the  specifically  economic 
motive  as  to  be  inseparable  from  it.  This  is  true  of  the 
narrative  in  all  of  its  aspects.  England  may  be  said  to  have 
launched  upon  her  Industrial  Revolution  unawares. "  With 
the  South  the  movement  was  conscious,  distinctly  marked 
in  its  commencement  in  the  minds  and  hearts  of  the  people!' 
In  Britain  the  human  problems  came  ~asT a  consequence  of 
the  development;  in  the  South  they  emerged  with  it  and 
remained,  for  a  long  period  at  least,  coeval  with  the  in- 
dustrial advance. i! 

In  this  view,  one  would  naturally  expect  the  business  im- 
pulse to  be  less  dominant  in  the  labor  factor  than  in  other 
particulars,  but  it  is  singularly  characteristic  of  the  incep- 
tion of  the  Southern  cotton  mills  that  other  phases  of  the 
history,  as  for  example  the  activities  of  entrepreneurs  and 
the  securing  of  capital,  were  as  much  bound  up  with  the 
essential  aspirations  of  the  section  as  was  the  participation 
of  men,  women  and  children  as  operatives.  Even  machin- 
ery was  wrapped  with  idealism  and  devotion.  As  the  in- 
dustry has  succeeded,  with  the  passing  of  years  there  has 
been  a  separation  of  the  economic  and  humanistic  elements 
so  intermixed  at  its  beginning ;  the  opaque  solution  has  been 
clarified  by  precipitation.  Forces  that  were  unified  at  the 
outset  have  developed  contrary  directions  and  have  shown 
unequal  power. 

The  story  of  the  workpeople  has  become  less  and  less  the 
story  of  the  employers.  Just  as  the  erection  of  plants,  once 
the  object  of  close  concern  on  the  part  of  a  whole  commu- 
nity, has  changed  to  a  technical  problem,  and  just  as  the 
monetary  operations  of  the  companies,  forty  years  ago  part 

1 60 


267]  THE   LABOR   FACTOR  l6l 

and  parcel  of  the  public  life,  have  narrowed  to  their  purely 
financial  qualities,  so  divergent  interests  of  capital  and  labor 
have  emerged.  In  a  region  as  newly  industrial  as  the  South, 
this  has  brought  questions  broadly  and  acutely  social.  In 
this  study  of  the  infancy  of  the  manufacture,  it  is  not  at- 
tempted, except  sketchily,  to  trace  the  lines  of  later  develop- 
ment. 

The  part  played  by  labor  in  the  rise  of  the  mills  cannot 
be  understood  unless  it  is  recognized  that  the  white  popu- 
lation of  the  South  is  homogeneous  and  has  always  been  so. 
There  is  no  distinction  in  blood  between  employers  and  em- 
ployees. The  inauguration  of  the  industry,  in  point  of 
capital  and  labor  alike,  took  place  within  the  Southern  fam- 
ily. It  made  for  an  intimacy  which  at  first  rendered  impos- 
sible and  which  continues  to  retard  division  between  fac- 
tory owners  and  workers  according  to  economic  interest. 
The  settlers  of  the  South  were  of  the  same  strains  and  pos- 
sessed the  same  characteristics.  For  an  initial  period'  they 
moved  along  the  same  occupational  lines.  The  invention  of 
the  cotton  gin  placed  slavery  in  the  ascendant.  Cotton  cul- 
tivation became  dominant.  The  healthy  industrial  impulse 
which  had  shown  itself  gave  way  before  agriculture.  The 
gin,  slavery  and  cotton  formed  the  wedge  that  pried  a  uni- 
fied population  apart.  Landowners  stood  separated  from 
the  propertyless;  as  industry  could  not  compete  with  agri- 
culture, so  those  without  farming  land  could  not  compete 
with  slave  labor. 

The  "  poor  whites  "  were  dispossessed,  not  only  of  pro- 
gressive occupation,  but  of  participation  in  the  larger  life 
of  the  section.  From  the  time  that  cotton  began  to  control 
until  after  the  period  of  Reconstruction,  these  people  lapsed 
into  the  background.1 

1  Cf .  Tompkins,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  p.  58. 
"  There  is  no  difference  in  blood  or  heritage  between  them  [the 
operatives]  and  the  mill  managements.  .  .  ."  It  is  interesting  to 
see  how  a  writer  in  1809,  regretting  the  exclusion  of  propertyless 
whites  through  the  cultivation  of  indigo  and  rice,  welcomed  the  new 
cotton  farming  as  bringing  these  people  back  to  economic  partici- 
pation, little  knowing  how  cotton  itself  would  soon  work  their  vaster 


1 62  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE    SOUTH        [268 

When  the  "poor  whites"  entered  the  mills,  they  reen- 
tered the  life  of  the  South.  As  cotton  culture  had  blocked 
progress,  so  cotton  mills,  while  not  dispelling  the  certainty 
of  painful  readjustments,  opened  the  way. to  a  rational  eco- 
nomic future. 

The  settlers  of  the  South  were  mainly  English,  German, 
Swiss,  French  Huguenot  and  Scotch^-Irish.  They  were  able 
pioneers — hardy,  industrious,  independent,  self-sufficient. 
They  desired  to  have  their  own  religions  and  to  maintain 
their  political  and  economic  freedom.  Whether  from  the 
Barbadoes,  from  New  England,  Pennsylvania,  Virginia; 
whether  Moravians  setting  up  their  churches  and  indus- 
tries; whether  Highlanders  loyal  to  the  Stuarts  and  fleeing 
Scotland  by  shiploads  after  the  battle  of  Culloden,  they 
blended  to  make  a  stock  which  has  no  superior.2 

The  term  "poor  white"  is  not  easily  defined,  although 
every  Southerner  knows  pretty  accurately  what  it  means. 
Writers,  some  through  carelessness  and  others  after  better 

ruin :  "  By  the  introduction  of  the  new  staple  the  poor  became  of 
value,  for  they  generally  were  or  at  least  might  be  elevated  to  this 
middle  grade  of  society.  Land  suitable  for  cotton  was  easily  at- 
tained. .  .  .  The  culture  of  it  might  be  carried  on  profitably  by  indi- 
viduals or  white  families  without  slaves,  and  afforded  employment 
for  children  whose  labor  was  of  little  or  no  account  on  rice  or  indigo 
plantations.  .  .  .  The  poor  having  the  means  of  acquiring  property 
without  the  degradation  of  working  with  slaves,  had  new  and  strong 
incitements  to  industry.  From  the  acquisition  of  property  the  transi- 
tion was  easy  to  that  decent  pride  of  character  which  secures  from 
low  vice,  and  stimulates  to  seek  distinction  by  deserving  it.  .  .  .  In 
estimating  the  value  of  cotton,  its  capacity  to  incite  industry  among 
the  lower  classes  of  people,  and  to  fill  the  country  with  an  independ- 
ent industrious  yeomanry,  is  of  high  importance.  It  has  had  a 
large  share  in  moralizing  the  poor  white  people  of  the  country'' 
(Ramsay,  History  of  South  Carolina,  quoted  in  Scherer,  pp.  170- 
171).  As  it  turned  out,  cotton  in  another  phase,  in  manufacture,  as 
William  Gregg  observed  nearly  fifty  years  later,  was  the  means  of 
"  developing  the  character  of  the  poor  people  of  South  Carolina." 
The  mills,  however,  have  dangers  of  being  harmful  in  their  evolu- 
tion as  they  were  helpful  in  their  inception,  if  they  are  allowed  to  be 
an  economic  pressure  instead  of  stimulus. 

2  Material  as  to  the  blood-strains  in  the  Southern  white  popula- 
tion is  plentiful.  The  following  references  are  convenient  ones,  and 
in  several  instances  give  illustration  of  the  character  and  early  life 
of  the  people :  Tompkins,  ibid.,  and  History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  i, 
pp.  4-6,  14-15,  18-19,  97-98;  Thompson,  pp.  17-18,  20-22;  Hart,  p. 
32.    County  and  State  histories  are  helpful  in  this  connection. 


269I]  THE   LABOR   FACTOR  1 63 

consideration,  are  mainly  at  variance  on  three  points.  The 
first  is  whether  there  was  and  continues  to  be  a  difference 
in  essential  character  between  the  indigent  classes  in  the 
mountains  and  foothills  and  in  the  low  country;  second, 
whether  the  name  "poor  whites"  is  applicable  to  both  of 
these  groups ;  third,  whether  there  was  a  middle  class  in  the 
South,  at  and  before  the  period  of  mill  building,  which  was 
to  be  distinguished  from  the  lowest  stratum  of  population. 

Fortunately  for  purposes  of  illustration,  observations  of 
writers  anywhere  from  about  1840  forward  can  be  used, 
because  the  character  of  the  people  from  whom  factory 
hands  were  recruited  did  not  change  materially  from  the 
time  that  cotton  became  king  until  their  ranks  had  become 
greatly  thinned  by  influx  to  the  mills. 

One  who  employed  broad  terms  spoke  of  the  "non- 
slaveholding  white  men  .  .  .  outside  the  essential  councils 
of  the  South,"  who  "  stood  aloof ;  they  were  supposed  to 
follow  where  others  led,"3  and  said  it  was  from  this  "  vague 
multitude  of  the  unlettered  and  unskilled  .  .  .  from  the 
great  army  of  the  non-participants  that  the  population  of 
the  factory  is  chiefly  drawn."4 

Mr.  Thompson  asserts  a  difference  between  the  indigent 
whites  of  the  mountains  and  those  nearer  the  middle  por- 
tion of  North  Carolina,  saying  that  in  the  extreme  west  the 
inhabitants  in  i860  lived  the  same  primitive  lives  as  their 
grandfathers,  while  unpropertied  whites  in  the  Piedmont 
were  not  socially  distinguished  from  their  more  fortunate 
neighbors  until  a  late  date.  White  men  would  often  assist 
a  landowner  whose  slaves  were  insufficient,  at  such  times 
sleeping  in  his  house  and  eating  at  his  table.  "  Indeed,  it  is 
not  too  much  to  say  that  the  Piedmont  section  of  North 
Carolina  was  more  nearly  a  social  democracy  after  1840 
than  were  the  manufacturing  sectionsr~of  New  England, 
where  by  that  date  there  was  a  well-defined  manufacturing 
aristocracy."     The  Civil  War,  however,  marked  the  com- 

3  Murphy,  pp.  14-15. 

4  Ibid.,  pp.  104-105.  Cf.  ibid.,  p.  103,  and  Phillips,  in  South  Mo- 
bilizing for  Social  Service,  p.  567. 


I64  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [27O 

mencement  of  the  increase  of  tenant  farmers  and  share- 
croppers with  consequent  class  cleavage.  Those  after- 
wards in  very  poor  circumstances  had  been  closely  associated 
in  general  estimation  with  the  small  traders  and  profes- 
sional men.5 

The  common  origin  of  mountain  whites  and  tenant  whites 
and  the  applicability  of  the  term  "  poor  whites "  to  both 
groups  is  noticed  by  Mr.  Hammond,  who  calls  them  all 
quite  properly,  in  view  of  circumstances  in  which  they 
found  themselves,  "parasitic."6  Along  with  his  character- 
istic bias  and  exaggeration  is  the  usual  portion  of  truth  in 
this  observation  of  a  Northern  newspaper  correspondent 
who  traveled  through  the  South  in  the  autumn  following 
Lee's  surrender :  "  Whether  the  North  Carolina  '  dirt  eater/ 
or  the  South  Carolina  '  sand-hiller,'  or  the  Georgia 
'cracker,'  is  lowest  in  the  scale  of  human  existence  would 
be  difficult  to  say.  The  ordinary  plantation  negro  seemed 
to  me,  when  I  first  saw  him  in  any  numbers,  at  the  very 
bottom  of  not  only  probabilities,  but  also  possibilities,  so 
far  as  they  affect  human  relations;  but  these  specimens  of 

5  Thompson,  p.  09  ff.  Early  title  deeds  show  the  settlers  in  the 
Piedmont  of  North  Carolina  to  have  been  weavers,  joiners,  coopers, 
wheelwrights,  wagon  makers,  tailors,  teachers,  blacksmiths,  hatters, 
merchants,  wine  makers,  surveyors,  fullers  and  "gentlemen"  (Tomp- 
kins, History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  i,  pp.  24-25).  Slavery  and  cotton 
had  worked  their  change  by  1856,  when  Olmsted  wrote  that  "  the 
slaveholders  have  .  .  .  secured  the  best  circumstances  for  the  em- 
ployment of  that  slave-labor  which  is  the  most  valuable  part  of  their 
capital.  They  need  no  assistance  from  the  poor  white  man :  his 
presence  near  them  is  disagreeable  and  unprofitable.  Condemned 
to  the  poorest  land,  and  restricted  to  the  labor  of  merely  providing 
for  themselves  the  simple  necessities  of  life,  they  are  equally  indif- 
ferent and  incompetent  to  materially  improve  their  minds  or  their 
wealth"  (p.  515).    Cf.  ibid.,  p.  296;  Tompkins,  ibid.,  p.  88. 

6  Speaking  of  cotton  culture  before  the  War,  "  the  majority  of  the 
white  laborers  were  of  the  class  of  '  poor  whites,'  many  of  them 
descendant's  of  the  '  redemptioners.'  .  .  .  these  people  .  .  .  had  be- 
come the  parasites  of  Southern  society.  Some  of  them  were  forced 
into  the  mountain  region  of  eastern  Tennessee  and  Kentucky  and 
western  North  Carolina,  and  others  were  left  on  the  abandoned  cot- 
ton and  tobacco  lands  of  the  sand  hill  region  of  South  Carolina  and 
Georgia"  (Hammond,  p.  97). 


27l]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  1 65 

the  white  race  must  have  reached  a  yet  lower  depth  of 
squalid  and  beastly  wretchedness."7 

That  the  poor  whites  were  the  victims  of  the  economic 
regime  and  that  their  laziness  was  to  be  attributed  in  large 
measure  to  this  prime  fact,  has  been  made  clear  by  a  keen 
and  sympathetic  student  of  Southern  economic  history. 
"All  whites  who  were  poor  were  not  'poor  whites,'1  but 
many  embraced  in  that  term  of  contempt  and  pity  were 
poor  ...  in  the  ambition  to  contend  against  what  seemed 
to  be  the  inevitable."  He  thinks  that,  corresponding  to  the 
countryman  in  New  England,  there  were  very  moderately 
circumstanced  whites  in  the  South  that  might  be  taken  as 
constituting  a  "yeomanry,"  but  that  below  these  were  "the 
neglected  people  who  .  .  .  were  but  little  removed  from 
the  status  of  the  settled  Indian.  .  .  .  They  were  the  de- 
generates, the  children  of  ancient  poverty  and  wrong,  with 
little  or  no  opportunity  to  better  their  condition  among  sur- 
roundings of  a  corrective  character.  .  .  .  Had  they  not 
been  too  lazy  to  wander  far  from  their  apologies  for  home,., 
they  would  have  become  American  gypsies.  .  .  .  The  vic- 
tims of  heredity  and  of  institutions  in  which  they  had  no- 
interest,  placed  under  laws  made  for  them  rather  than  by 
them,  they  were  happily  removed  from  the  pressure  of 
population  that  would  undoubtedly  have  reduced  them  ta- 
the  criminal  or  the  dependent  class."8 

7  Andrews,  pp.  335-336.  "  The  Georgia  '  Cracker '  .  .  .  seems  to> 
me  to  lack  not  only  all  that  the  negro  does,  but  also  even  the  desire 
for  a  better  condition  and  the  vague  longing  for  the  enlargement 
of  his  liberties  and  his  rights." 

8  Ingle,  p.  22  ff.  "  John  Forsythe  of  Mobile  hit  off  some  of  their 
traits  in  contrasting  the  unadulterated  '  Cracker '  and  an  unadul- 
terated Yankee,  born  and  bred  in  the  country.  '  One  is  slow  .  .  . 
and  the  other  quick;  one  takes  a  minute  to  rise  from  his  seat,  the 
other  never  sits  at  all  except  in  pursuance  of  a  calculation ;  one  is 
not  without  faculties,  but  they  seem  to  be  all  asleep,  the  other  with 
all  his  wits  alive  with  sagacity,  curiosity,  invention.  The  one  con- 
tent to  doze  away  life  with  as  little  labor  as  possible  and  all  the- 
enjoyment  compassable;  his  log.  hut,  wool  hat,  homespun  suit,  and 
corn  and  bacon  the  limits  of  his  desires  .  .  . ;  loving  his  gun  and. 
his  horse,  addicted  to  tobacco  and  strong  drink,'  quick  to  anger,  a 
dangerous  enemy,  and  a  fast  friend.  The  other  instinct  with  life 
.  .  .  never  satisfied  with  the  present  wellbeing  while  anything  better 


1 66  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [272 

Governor  Hammond,  of  South  Carolina,  was  moderate 
when  he  said:  "According  to  the  best  calculations  which, 
in  the  absence  of  statistic  facts,  can  be  made,  it  is  believed 
that,  of  the  300,000  white  inhabitants  of  South  Carolina, 
there  are  not  less  than  50,000,  whose  industry,  such  as  it  is, 
and  compensated  as  it  is,  is  not,  in  the  present  condition  of 
things,  and  does  not  promise,  hereafter,  to  be,  adequate  to 
procure  them,  honestly,  such  a  support  as  every  white  per- 
son in  this  country  is  and  feels  himself  entitled  to."9 

Professor  Hart  believes  that  the  term  "  poor  whites " 
means  lowlanders,  and  that  the  mountaineers  belong  in  a 
different  category.  His  reason  is  chiefly  that  the  mountain 
whites  do  not  have  to  contend  with  the  universal  presence 
of  the  Negro.  It  is  to  be  remembered  that  this  distinction 
is  of  later  emergence,  and  that  slavery  was  responsible  for 

is  beyond  to  tempt  his  longings  and  his  wits.' "  A  South  Carolinian 
who  seemed  to  be  informed  gave  Olmsted  his  opinion  that  com- 
munities of  poor  whites  on  the  banks  of  the  Congaree  River  were 
in  more  hopeless  plight  than  the  degraded  peons  of  Mexico,  and  a 
rice  planter  described  similar  people  living  in  the  pine  barrens  near- 
est the  coast :  "  They  seldom  have  any  meat  .  .  .  except  they  steal 
hogs,  which  belong  to  the  planters,  or  their  negroes,  and  their  chief 
diet  is  rice  and  milk.  They  are  small,  gaunt,  and  cadaverous,  and 
their  skin  is  just  the  color  of  the  sandhills  they  live  on.  They  are 
quite  incapable  of  applying  themselves  steadily  to  any  labor,  and 
their  habits  are  very  much  like  those  of  the  old  Indians  "  (p.  505  ff.). 
A  Northerner  told  Olmsted  of  stopping  once  at  a  sand-hiller's  cabin. 
One  of  the  four  grown  daughters  was  weaving,  the  others  seeming 
to  have  nothing  to  do.  " '  I  asked  the  girl  at  the  loom  how  much 
she  could  make  a  day  by  her  work.  She  did  not  know,  but  I  ascer- 
tained that  the  stuff  she  wove  was  bought  at  a  factory  in  the  vicinity, 
to  be  used  for  bagging  yarn ;  and  she  was  paid  in  yarn.  .  .  .  She 
traded  off  the  yarn  at  a  store  for  what  she  had  to  buy.  ...  If  she 
worked  steadily  from  daylight  to  dark  .  .  .  her  wages  .  .  .  were  less 
than  sixteen  cents  a  day,  boarding  herself.  .  .  .  These  people  are 
regarded  by  the  better  class  with  as  little  respect  as  slaves  .  .  .'" 
(ibid.,  p.  507).  This  was  in  South  Carolina.  Twenty-five  or  thirty 
years  later  such  establishments  as  this  bagging  mill  had  largely  dis- 
appeared, the  bartering  of  yarn  was  no  longer  practiced,  and  such 
a  family  of  girls  as  here  described  was  in  all  likelihood  working 
immediately  in  a  cotton  factory  for  money  wages. 

9  Quoted  in  Olmsted,  p.  514.  Here  again  is  the  thought  that  they 
were  crowded  out  of  occupations :  "  Some  cannot  be  said  to  work 
at  all.  They  obtain  a  precarious  subsistence  by  occasional  jobs,  by 
hunting,  by  fishing,  sometimes  by  plundering  fields  or  folds,  and, 
too  often,  by  .  .  .  trading  with  slaves,  or  seducing  them  to  plunder 
for  their  benefit." 


273] 


THE   LABOR   FACTOR 


167 


the  history  of  the  class  of  unfortunate  whites,  whether  they 
were  left  in  the  low-country,  stranded  upon  the  sandhills 
between  coastal  plain  and  Piedmont,  or  driven  into  the 
hills.10  — 

The  pertinence  of  recent  accounts  of  the  poorer  moun?- 
tain  and  tenant  whites  in  their  native  surroundings  is  illus- 
trated by  the  fact  that  the  mills  very  recently  were  receiving 
families  in  just  as  destitute  condition  as  those  which  first 
entered  the  factory  communities.11  They  regularly  came 
with  empty  hands.  An  episode  recited  of  a  mill  at  Spar- 
tanburg is  typical,  where  "one  day  a  covered  wagon  or 
mountain  schooner  drove  up  to  the  .  .  .  office.  It  was  full 
of~family  and  that  wasabout  all.  '  You  could  put  uponja. 
smalLtable  all  the  earthly  possessions  of  that  family/  said 
Mr.  Montgomery.  The  man  asked  for  work.  Mr._Mont- 
gomery  told  the  superintendent  tofindjhem  a_vacant  house. 
'  Buf  whaTaibouttne  rashuns?  'Inquired1  the  new  'help.'  "12 

The  most  recent  historian  of  the  American  industry  in 
his  description  o>f  the  people  who  filled  the  mills  of  the 
South  does  not  distinguish  between  Piedmont,  mountain, 
and  lowland  (tenant)  whites.13 

It  has  been  seen  that  while  many  of  the  Southern  mill 
ventures  were  undertaken  partly  with  the  express  purpose 

10  Southern  South,  p.  30.  For  some  account  of  the  middle-country 
poor  whites,  with  a  list  of  the  disparaging  names  applied  to  them, 
see  ibid.,  p.  38;  a  description  of  the  mountaineers  (p.  34 ff.)  is  most 
dismal. 

11  An  admirable  recent  picture  of  the  life  of  the  poor  whites  in 
mountain  and  lowland  sections  is  contained  in  a  painstaking  pam- 
phlet by  Frances  Sage  Bradley  and  Margaretta  A.  Williamson, 
"  Rural  Children  in  Selected  Counties  of  North  Carolina,"  published 
by  the  Children's  Bureau  of  the  U.  S.  Department  of  Labor. 

"Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  1916.  Of  a  factory  at  Rock 
Hill  it  is  reported :  "  A  man  who  moved  to  the  mill  from  Union 
County  a  few  years  ago  was  so  poverty  stricken  that  he  had  not 
even  a  bed  upon  which  to  sleep.  He  was  in  such  poverty  that  it  was 
a  matter  of  jest"  (ibid.).  Of  another  mill  village  it  is  told  that 
"  nineteen  families  have  moved  into  this  community  within  the  last 
fourteen  years,  bringing  their  entire  worldly  possessions  in  one 
wagon  load  .  .  .  ;  none  of  these  .  .  .  families  had  a  stick  of  fur- 
niture or  a  sack  of  flour  or  the  means  to  provide  for  the  same" 
(ibid.). 

13  Copeland,  pp.  40-41. 


L*^ 


1 68  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        \_27A 

of  giving  work  to  the  poor  whites,  in  a  good  many  cases  the 
opportunity  for  profitable  employment  of  these  people  was 
entirely  overlooked,  this  giving  color  to  the  belief  that  in 
proportion  as  the  poor  whites  dropped  out  of  participation 
in  the  economic  order,  they  tended  to  drop  out  of  the  mind 
of  the  dominant  class.  The  abolition  of  slavery  did  not 
bring  the  neglected  men  and  women  immediately  back  into 
the  thought  and  sympathy  of  the  South  any  more  than  into 
the  employment  of  the  South.14 

It  has  been  seen  that  William  Gregg,  the  builder  of  the 
Graniteville  Factory  in  South  Carolina,  was  the  father,  in 
the  sense  that  he  was  the  anticipator,  of  a  new  economic 
life  for  the  South.  His  keen  consciousness  of  the  poor 
whites  stands  out  in  striking  contrast  to  the  state  of  mind 
indicated  in  the  preceding  paragraphs.  It  is  interesting  to 
notice  a  statement  of  Gregg's  which  shows  clearly  the  con- 
dition of  the  lower  strata  of  the  white  population  fifteen 
years  before  the  war ;  it  is  to  be  remarked  that  he  was  com- 
bating a  tendency  not  simply  to  omit  the  poor  whites  from 
consideration,  but  to  place  the  negroes  ahead  of  these  even, 
as  possible  industrial  workers.  "  Should  we  stop,"  he  asked, 
"  at  the  effort  to  prove  the  capacity  of  blacks  for  manufac- 
turing? IShall  we  pass  unnoticed  the  thousands  of  poor, 
ignorant,  degraded  white  people  among  us,  who,  in  this 
land  of  plenty,  live  in  comparative  nakedness  and  starva- 
tion ?  "f  A.nd  he  continued : 

Many  a  one  is  reared  in  proud  South-Carolina,  from  birth  to  man- 
hood, who  has  never  passed  a  month  in  which  he  has  not  some  part 
of  the  time,  been  stinted  for  meat.  Many  a  mother  is  there,  who 
will  tell  you  that  her  children  are  but  scantily  supplied  with  bread. 
.  .  .  These  are  startling  statements,  but  they  are  nevertheless  true, 
and  if  not  believed  in  Charleston,  the  members  of  our  Legislature, 
who  have  traversed  the  State,  in  electioneering  campaigns,  can  attest 
their  truth. 

14  A  Virginia  correspondent  of  the  American  Agriculturist  before 
the  War  asserted  that  whites  could  be  got  to  work  for  less  price 
than  blacks,  but  the  slaves  were  preferred.  Newcomers  were  ad- 
vised, if  they  wished  to  use  whites,  to  bring  them  with  them,  since 
the  native  white  population  was  inferior  to  the  black  (quoted  in 
Olmsted,  pp.  211-212).  A  farmer  in  the  same  State  who  employed 
only  free  labor  found  Irishmen  at  $120  a  year  the  best  workers; 
native  whites  were  declared  worse  than  free  blacks   (ibid.,  p.  99). 


2/5^  THE   LABOR   FACTOR  1 69 

It  is  only  necessary  to  build  a  manufacturing  village  of  shanties, 
in  a  healthy  location  in  any  part  of  the  State,  to  have  crowds  of 
these  poor  people  around  you,  seeking  employment  at  half  the  com- 
pensation given  to  operatives  at  the  North.  It  is  indeed  pitiful  to 
be  brought  in  contact  with  such  ignorance  and  degradation ;  but  on 
the  other  hand,  it  is  pleasant  to  witness  the  change,  which  soon 
takes  place  in  the  condition  of  those  who  obtain  employment.  The 
emaciated,  pale-faced  children,  soon  assume  the  appearance  of  robust 
health.  ...  It  is,  perhaps,  not  generally  known,  but  there  are  twenty- 
nine  thousand  white  persons  in  this  State,  above  the  age  of  twelve 
years,  who  can  neither  read  nor  write — this  is  about  one  in  every 
five  of  the  whole  population.15 

A  writer  already  quoted  refers  to  the  poor  whites  of  the 
ante-bellum  South  as  constituting  part  of  the  last  grade 
of  a  class  distinguishable  from  both  the  unpropertied  and 
the  influential  landowners,  which  might  be  termed  a  "yeo- 
manry," but  he  notices  their  tendency  to  sink  rather  than 
rise  in  the  social  order.18 

Thus  again  it  is  indicated  how  the  pressure  of  slavery,  if 
it  worked  to  bring  a  small  number  to  the  surface,  gave  to 
masses  an  impulse  ever  downward. 

There  is  very  little  to  show  the  character  of  the  white 
operatives  in  the  small  and  scattered  factories  that  existed 
in  the  South  prior  to  the  great  rise  of  mills  about  1880. 
Many  were  doubtless  immigrants  or  descendants  of  recent 
immigrants.  The  Graniteville  mill  had  workpeople  who  did 
not  differ  materially  in  their  economic  or  social  aspects 
from  those  in  later  manufacturing  communities,  and  per- 
haps the  same  may  be  said  of  a  few  other  establishments  in 
the  ante-bellum  period.    But  Graniteville  was  not  typical  of 


15  Domestic  Industry,  p.  22.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  knowledge 
of  the  plight  of  the  poor  whites  gained  in  electioneering  campaigns 
was  passive,  and  did  not  awaken  a  purpose  to  improve  conditions. 
Gregg  himself,  as  a  member  of  the  legislature,  was  the  exception 
that  proved  the  rule.  Despite  the  difficulty  of  travel  and  the  absence 
of  "  statistic  facts,"  as  Governor  Hammond  said,  public  ignorance 
of  a  20  per  cent  illiteracy  in  the  white  population  is  as  reprehensible 
as  the  fact  of  the  illiteracy  itself.  When  Gregg  was  working  out 
his  philosophy  in  practice,  he  reported  to  his  Graniteville  stock-  , 
holders  in  1855  that  79  in  100  grown  girls  who  came  to  the  mill  could 
neither  read  not  write,  adding  that  "  that  reproach  has  long  since 
been  removed"  (quoted  in  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C.,  p.  21).  Cf. 
statement  of  a  colporteur  in  Olmsted,  p.  510. 

16  Ingle,  pp.  20-21. 


170  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [276 

I  I  its  time.  Graniteville  tapped  a  class  of  labor  as  a  class;  the 
'smaller  factories,  with  all  sorts  of  local  limitations  in  situa- 
tion, power,  machinery  and  peculiarities  of  operation,  at- 
tracted only  individuals,  had  no  labor  objective.  It  was  not 
recognized  that  any  widespread  condition  existed  that  made 
employment  in  mills  desirable,  and  no  distinctive  problems 
grew  out  of  the  collecting  of  persons  in  the  little  villages 
surrounding  the  factories.  That  many  negroes  were  used 
in  these  enterprises,  alone  or  with  whites,  helps  to  blur  the 
picture  of  the  white  operatives.  In  the  matter  of  labor, 
these  early  establishments  corresponded  roughly  with  grist 
mills  and  saw  mills  then  and  today.  Nobody  bothered  about 
where  the  employees  came  from  or  why.  It  is  probable 
that  in  most  instances  they  had  been  living  in  the  imme- 
diate localities.  It  may  be  concluded  that  the  difference 
between  the  mills  before  the  great  period  and  those  which 
followed,  with  respect  to  labor,  was  one  of  size  of  the 
manufacturing  unit  and  of  degree  of  standardization  of 
the  industry.17 

The  amount  that  had  to  be  done  for  the  poor  whites  after 
they  came  to  the  mills  (speaking  now  of  the  large  develop- 
ment of  factories),  and  their  too  evident  entire  newness  to 
the  demands  of  progressive  living,  reflect  a  light  back  upon 
the  years  in  which  they  had  been  pushed  aside.  The  his- 
tory of  the  industry  since  1880,  in  the  human  phase,  has 
been  chiefly  the  effort  at  reinstatement  of  a  great  portion 
of  the  population  previously  neglected.18  Sometimes  the 
peopkbxought  with  them  little  besjdej__bjid^  habits  and  a 

17  Glimpses  of  before-the-war  operatives  frequently  indicate  for- 
eign birth  or  ancestry,  and  are  not  always  inspiriting.  Cf.  Olmsted, 
PP-  356-357;  Buckingham,  Slave  States  of  America,  vol.  i,  p.  171. 

18  A  recent  president  of  the  chamber  of  commerce  of  a  capital 
city  said  that  while  in  office  he  refused  to  give  his  especial  support 
to  projects  to  establish  cotton  mills  in  the  place  because  of  all  the 
people  who  came  to  a  factory,  only  five  or  six  families  would  be 
composed  of  desirable  citizens,  the  rest  lowering  the  average  of 
population.  "  You  have  to  take  care  of  these  people  when  they  are 
sick,"  he  explained,  "  and  you  must  give  them  schools  and  churches. 
Thousands  of  dollars,  of  course,  were  spent  in  eradicating  the  hook 


277^  THE   LAB0R   FACTOR  171 

total  dependence  upon  the  management  for  moral  care  and 
^ysicah  upbnMTngT® 

HoweTeTTmich  the  poor  whites  had  failed  of  recognition 
before,  instances  are  rare  in  which  mill  men,  at  the  outset 
of  the  factory  era  in  the  South  or  later,  have  complained  of 
the  quality  of  the  operatives.  It  may  be  said  that  the  work 
of  a  cotton  mill,  certainly  a  mill  on  coarse  goods,  is  scarcely 
skilled  at  all,  and  that  in  the  beginning  management  was  as 
unaccustomed  to  its  task  as  spinner  and  weaver  to  theirs. 
It  may  be  observed  that  labor  was  above  all  cheap,  and  that 
advantage  thus  conferred  silenced  all  objection.  But  the 
fact  is  not  altered  that  Southern  mill  owners  showed  a 
splendid  faith  in  the  capacity  of  their  workpeople.  North- 
ern superintendents  in  Southern  manufactories  seemed 
unanimous  in  their  satisfaction  with  the  labor. 

One  of  the  most  distinguished  of  Southern  mill  projectors 
wrote  in  reply  to  some  doubting  remarks  of  another  South- 
ern manufacturer :  "  I  do  not  admit  that  the  Northern  peo- 
ple are  any  better  material  out  of  which  to  make  cotton 
manufacturers  and  operatives  than  our  own,  and  especially 
in  the  '  Piedmont  belt,'  of  the  South,  is  the  best  in  the 
United  States,  and  capable  of  being  educated  to  as  high  an 
order  of  skill  as  any  other.  I  have  been  in  most  of  the  best 
mills  at  the  North  .  .  .  and  have  observed  their  operations 
closely,  and  I  challenge  that  there  is  as  high  skill  and  an 
equal  degree  of  expertness  in  the  operatives  of  the  Pied- 
mont Mill,  as  far  as  the  kind  of  goods  made  requires  .  .  . 
as  is  to  be  found  in  any  mill  in  New  England."20 

19  The  head  of  a  large  establishment  told  how  "  ninety  per  cent  of 
the  operatives — kids  and  all — used  to  use  snuff.  We  would  get 
from  the  loom-boxes,  where  they  would  leave  them,  a  barrel  of  snuff 
boxes  a  week  in  cleaning.  Now  not  fifteen  per  cent  use  snuff"  (T. 
S.  Raworth,  int.,  Augusta,  Ga.,  Dec.  30,  1916). 

20  Letter  of  H.  P.  Hammett  to  Atlanta  Constitution,  quoted  in 
Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Feb.  1,  1883.  An  old  man,  look- 
ing back  to  the  starting  of  his  mill  forty  years  ago,  said  to  the 
writer  with  a  determined  look  in  his  eye :  "In  a  speech  made  in 
Atlanta  at  the  Exposition  [1881]  Edward  Atkinson  told  us  that  we 
couldn't  manufacture  goods  in  the  Southern  States  because  we 
couldn't  get  help  down  here;  that  we  should  let  them  manufacture 
the  cotton  and  we  raise  the  cotton.    I  saw  the  help  coming  in  from 


1^2  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        |_2^8 

It  has  been  seen  that  some  writers  would  distinguish  be- 
tween the  mountain  whites,  the  poor  whites  of  the  Pied- 
mont belt  and  the  corresponding  group  in  the  coastal  plain ; 
that  some  question  exists  as  to  the  application  of  the  term 
"  poor  whites  " ;  and  that  some  believe  there  was  a  tolerably 
defined  middle  class  in  the  South  before  and  following  the 
war.  However  these  facts  may  be,  it  is  chiefly  important 
to  understand  that  the  mills  drew  from  all  these  divisions 
of  poor  whites,  and  if  there  was  a  group  between  them  and 
the  upper  whites,  it  did  not  work  to  alter  the  essential  eco- 
nomic situation.  Whatever  technical  differences  existed 
prior  to  the  opening  of  the  factories,  in  the  willingness  to 
seek  mill  employment  there  was  a  general  merger  of  types 
of  indigent  white  people.21 

Genenous  estimates  of  the  capacities  and  promise  of  the 
poor  whites  in  the  mills  and  out  of  them  are  as  easy  to  find 
as  it  is  natural  to  give  them.  Anyone  who  sees  the  people 
in  the  country  or  in  the  industrial  communities  and  who 
knows  anything  of  their  lives,  feels  a  respectful  warmth  go 
out  to  them.  With  all  the  marks  of  their  hindrance  upon 
them,  he  must  recognize  that  they  have  all  the  worth  which 
the  best  blood  in  America  can  bestow.22 

dinner  at  Fall  River  in  the  eighties,  and  it  couldn't  compare  to 
ours!"  (Charles  Estes,  int.,  Augusta).  Another  old  man  declared: 
"  North  Carolina  has  within  its  borders  more  Anglo-Saxon  blood 
than  any  other  State  in  the  Union.  There  is  no  better  labor  in  the 
United  States  than  in  the  cotton  mills  of  North  Carolina"  (Charles 
McDonald,  int.,  Charlotte,  N.  C,  Sept.  3,  1916).  It  has  been  prop- 
erly observed  that  the  term  "  poor  white  trash,"  common  in  writing 
about  the  South,  is  rarely  used  by  Southern  whites.  "  They  are  un- 
progressive,  they  fail  to  make  the  most  of  their  opportunities,  but 
they  are  not  degraded.  It  is  suspended  or  arrested  development 
rather  than  degeneracy"  (Thompson,  p.  113). 

21  Cf.  Thompson,  pp.  69-70. 

22  The  statement  of  Mr.  Baldwin,  principal  of  the  Piedmont  Indus- 
trial School  at  Charlotte,  while  very  familiar,  is  worth  quoting  here. 
He  is  speaking  especially  of  the  operatives  in  his  own  section :  "  I 
am  satisfied  that  they  are  the  finest  body  of  people  on  earth  doing 
similar  work.  Descended  from  the  early  English,  Scotch  and  Ger- 
mans, they  have  been  sleeping,  as  it  were,  while  the  procession  of 
progress  has  been  passing  by.  Serious,  independent,  as  all  hill  and 
mountain  people  are;  sensitive,  because  of  that  independent  spirit, 
for  the  most  part  sober,  they  are  a  people  of  untold  possibilities, 
now  that  they  are  beginning  to  arouse  themselves  from  the  drowsi- 


279]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  173 

The  cotton  mill  operatives  came  immediately  from  the 
soil.  The  cotton  manufacturing'  South  sprang  directly 
from  the  cotton  growing  South.  It  is  probable  that  never 
before  or  since  in  economic  history  has  an  agricultural 
population  been  so  suddenly  drawn  into  industry.  The 
sharp  emergence  of  manufacturing  from  farming,  the  more 
abrupt  because  long  delayed,  is  in  a  large  way  the  theme  lof 
this  study.  The  picture  is  one  with  a  cotton  mill  in  the 
foreground  and  acres  of  cotton  plants  in  the  background, 
stretching  away  almost  to  the  horizon. 

The  relation  between  farm  and  factory  was  especially 
close  in  the  case  of  labor.  In  the  decision  of  individual  men 
and  families  to  leave  the  land  for  the  manufacturing  vil- 
lage it  is  possible  to  see,  very  tangibly,  the  working  of 
causes  that  were  moving  the  whole  South.  In  another  place 
the  counter  pull  of  the  plough  against  the  spindle  will  be 
mentioned,  when  it  will  be  shown  how  now  one  and  now 
the  other,  in  the  estimation  of  workers,  has  gained  ascend- 
ancy. At  this  point  it  is  important  to  notice  briefly  the 
agricultural  conditions  prevailing  at  about  the  time  of  the 
rise  of  the  mills. 

It  has  been  said  of  North  Carolina  that  "before  1890 
the  question  of  satisfactory  labor  had  not  been  entirely 
solved.  The  better  class  of  labor  was  not  easily  drawn  from 
the  farm9  to  the  factories."  After  1890  the  price  of  cotton, 
due  to  increased  production  of  the  domestic  staple,  to  the 
size  of  Egyptian  and  Indian  crops,  and  the  depression  fal- 
lowing the  panic  of  1893,  fell  lower  and  lower.  The  crops 
of  1894  and  1895  brought  for  the  most  part  about  five  cents 
per  pound,  and  low  prices  of  wheat,  corn  and  tobacco  ac- 
companied the  drop  in  cotton.  Fertilizer  bills  were  hard  to 
meet,  mortgages  were  difficult  to  carry.  Cotton  mills  were 
running  day  and  night  and  selling  yarns  in  the  markets  of 
Philadelphia,  New  York,  Boston  and  the  Orient.     In  this 

ness  of  generations  and  to  grapple  earnestly  with  the  duties  of  this 
active,  work-a-day  world"  (quoted  in  Goldsmith,  p.  27).  Cf.  Kohn, 
Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  pp.  21-22.  "  These  people  are  all  Americans, 
and  hundreds  could  qualify  as  Sons  or  Daughters  of  the  Revolu- 
tion" (Thompson,  pp.  110-111). 


174  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [j280 

condition  of  things,  farms  were  sold,  rental  arrangements 
were  not  renewed  and  industrious  and  lazy  alike  flocked  to 
the  mill  communities.23  In  the  case  of  other  Southern 
States,  the  development  came  earlier  and  more  abruptly 
than  in  North  Carolina,  and  the  abandonment  of  farming 
for  the  factory  occupation  was  not  so  dependent  upon  the 
price  of  the  staple  at  the  particular  time.  Even  in  North 
Carolina,  however,  the  causes  back  of  the  migration,  if  it 
may  be  spoken  of  a9  such,  were  of  much  longer  standing 
than  the  account  just  given  might  be  taken  to  indicate. 

The  condition  of  South  Carolina  in  the  decade  before  the 
war,  in  which  the  average  value  of  the  productive  industry 
of  the  State  was  declared  not  to  exceed  $62  per  head  of  the 
whole  population,  omitting  the  two  largest  cities,  persisted, 
roughly,  down  to  the  years  of  the  rise  of  the  mills.24 

The  desperate,  almost  comical  poverty  of  after-the-war 
years  left  on  the  minds  of  men  who  lived  through  them  im- 
pressions that  will  not  be  erased.  "  In  my  county,"  said 
one  of  these,  "  the  term  '  farmer  *  applied  to  a  man  was  a 
name  something  very  like  reproach.  Every  bull  yearling 
was  under  chattel  mortgage."25 

23  Thompson,  pp.  69-70.  Cf.  H.  J.  Davenport,  Economics  of  En- 
terprise, p,  201. 

24  From  an  article  on  the  agriculture  of  South  Carolina,  written 
for  The  Carolinian  by  a  resident  of  the  State,  and  printed  after- 
wards in  DeBow's  Review;  quoted  by  Olmsted,  pp.  518-519.  "Full 
one-half,  or  more,  of  this  amount  is  consumed  on  the  plantation  or 
farm,  as  necessary  means  of  subsistence;  leaving  about  $31  as  the 
value  of  cotton  and  other  marketable  produce,  per  head." 

25  Henry  E.  Litchf ord,  int.,  Richmond.  The  story  of  a  family 
brought  to  a  Charlotte  factory  when  the  Mountain  Island  mill  was 
washed  away  in  the  summer  of  1916  is  illustrative  of  conditions  pre- 
vailing forty  years  ago.  The  old  woman  and  her  three  daughters 
had  recently  become  operatives,  and  had  nothing.  With  a  fourth 
daughter,  afterwards  married,  the  family  had  tried  to  farm  in  the 
foothills.  They  made  fairly  good  crops,  the  girls  working  in  the 
field,  but,  in  payment  for  land,  stock,  implements  and  feed,  the  land- 
lord took  all  they  made  above  a  bare  living  and  a  dress  or  two  a 
year  and  a  pair  of  shoes  for  each  occasionally.  When  the  old 
woman  finally  left  for  the  mill  village  she  was  able  to  pay  herself 
out  of  debt  and,  so  "the  man"  told  her,  she  had  $7.50  coming  to 
her  in  cash,  but  this  she  never  got.  In  the  mill  town  they  proved 
thrifty,  the  mother  managing  to  keep  her  family  going  a  whole  week 
on  $5  advanced  by  the  management  (Sterling  Graydon,  int.,  Char- 
lotte). 


28l]]  THE   LABOR   FACTOR  175 

One  who  has  witnessed  the  economic  awakening  of 
Greenville  County,  South  Carolina,  from  the  commence- 
ment, rehearsing  the  evils  of  the  system  under  which 
farmers  bought  on  credit,  paying  once  a  year,  frequently  by 
note,  much  to  the  hurt  of  the  agricultural  community,  spoke 
with  satisfaction  of  the  change  since  that  time.  He  said 
that  now  no  merchant  in  Greenville  does  a  time  business 
with  farmers.  The  latter  get  small  loans  at  the  banks ;  one 
bank  has  for  many  years  been  lending  some  people  regu- 
larly such  small  sums  as  thirty  dollars,  and  it  will  lend  as 
little  as  ten  dollars.  He  remembers  what  may  almost  be 
said  to  have  been  the  beginning  of  a  local  money  economy. 
He  saw  the  first  whole  bale  of  cotton  ever  brought  to  the 
Greenville  market.  The  man  who  purchased  it  was  con- 
sumed with  fear  as  to  his  wisdom  in  putting  so  much  money 
in  cotton.  Would  the  county  ever  need  so  much?  This 
was  about  1870,  and  gives  a  notion  of  the  pettiness  of  farm 
operations  in  the  up-country  region  then  and  later.26 

A  system  of  tenancy  in  which  the  farmer  contributed 
little  or  nothing  besides  his  own  labor ;  in  which,  by  custom, 
by  pressure  of  the  landlord,  by  dictate  of  his  creditor  mer- 
chant and  by  absence  of  initiative,  the  tenant  raised  only 
cotton ;  and  by  the  working  of  which  the  proceeds  of  a  crop, 
on  which  a  lien  was  held,  were  consumed  before  they  were 
realized,  could  not  make  agriculture  promising.27  It  is  re- 

26  W.  J.  Thackston,  int.,  Greenville.  The  almost  total  absence  of 
money  in  rural  communities  will  be  noticed  later.  Mr.  Kohn,  after 
reviewing  the  situation  of  operatives  at  the  time  they  were  farmers, 
came  to  the  conclusion  that  "  the  attraction  of  the  cotton  mills,  to 
those  who  are  in  them,  in  a  word,  is  the  cash  money"  (Cotton  Mills 
of  S.  C,  p.  26).     Cf.  ibid.,  pp.  22,  27. 

27  Some  facts  gathered  by  Mr.  Kohn  as  to  recently  prevailing 
tenancy  arrangements  in  South  Carolina  serve  as  a  fair  picture  of 
earlier  conditions.  In  the  Pee-Dee  section  the  landlord  ordinarily 
paid  for  fertilizers,  ginning,  bagging  and  ties,  and  the  tenant  received 
half  the  crop.  It  was  thought  good  for  a  tenant  to  "  make  "  fifteen 
bales  of  cotton,  his  half,  at  $50  a  bale,  bringing  him  $375.  The  sale 
of  a  few  bushels  of  corn  not  needed  to  feed  the  stock,  and  hauling 
and  other  work  might  net  him  $150  additional,  a  total  of  $525.  This 
family  might  have  one  plough  and  two  hoe  hands.  The  same  family 
in  a  cotton  mill,  at  the  time  of  writing,  would  have  made  about  $900. 
A  tenant  in  the  Piedmont  section,  having  to  share  in  the  cost  of  fer- 


i 

/ 


I76  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [282 

lated  that  the  help  for  a  mill  built  as  late  as  1896,  picked  up 
on  the  neighboring  farms,  "had  no  money,  no  prospects. 
Cotton  was  the  only  money  crop  and  the  price,  four  and 
one-half  cents,  was  such  as  to  make  a  year's  wages  insig- 
nificant by  comparison  with  what  could  be  earned  in  the 
mills.  They  came  to  the  mills  for  employment,  for  relief 
from  the  weight  that  pressed  down  upon  them."28 

Having  seen  something  of  the  character  of  the  poor 
whites  and  the  economic  situation  in  which  they  were  before 
the  building  of  the  factories,  it  is  natural  next  to  examine 
theexperience  of  the  mills  in  recruiting  labor.  First  will 
be  noticed  the  cases,  alimost"uKivefsal,  in  which  applicants 
for  work  were  plentiful,  and  afterwards  some  instances  in 
which,  for  special  reasons,  operatives  were  not  so  readily 
obtained. 

The  labor  motive  for  the  building  of  mills  has  been  dealt 
with  in  a  previous  chapter.  Plenti fulness  of  labor  is  an 
easy  conclusion  from  the  arguments  advanced  that  cotton 
manufactories  should  be  established  in  the  South  because 
labor  was  cheap  and  because  the  employment  would  be  a 
benefit  to  large  numbers  who  had  only  precarious  means  of 
livelihood.  In  only  a  few  cases  in  which  sufficient  labor  for 
a  proposed  mill  was  felt  assured,  did  the  anticipation  prove 
incorrect.  There  was  little  guessing  involved;  it  was  a 
mine  the  veins  of  which  lay  in  a  net- work  on  the  surface  of 
the  earth.  The  question  was  whether  mills  could  be  built, 
.  not  whether  they  could  be  filled  with  workpeople  pressing 
to  be  admitted. 

Gregg's   recognition  that  the  poor  whites  would  make 

tilizer,  would  have  very  little  left  after  meeting  the  advances  of  the 
merchant  and  fitting  out  his  family  with  clothes  (Cotton  Mills  of 
S.  C,  pp.  27-28).  Cf.  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  South  Caro- 
lina in  1884;  Bradley  and  Williamson,  pp.  20-21;  Charles  H.  Otken, 
The  Ills  of  the  South,  chaps,  ii  and  Hi;  Hammond,  pp.  144 ff.,  155. 
28  Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  1916.  For  a  good  statement  of 
the  reasons  why  poor  whites  came  to  the  mills,  see  Derrick,  "  The 
Cotton  Mill  Population  of  the  South,"  in  Bulletin  of  Newberry  Col- 
lege (S.  C),  vol.  ii,  no.  8,  pp.  32-33.  Cf.  Thompson,  p.  114 ff.  on 
this  point  and  for  an  interesting  classification  of  types  that  enter  the 
factories ;  the  same  classification  might  have  been  made  forty  years 
ago  with  equal  truth. 


283]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  177 

good  cotton  mill  operatives  is  matched  by.  the  view  of  a 
Northern  man  made  a  decade  before  the  war,  that  if  the 
cotton  manufacturing  industry  should  be  founded  in  the 
South,  labor  would  be  in  supply.  He  urged  that  cotton 
planters  should  become  cotton  manufacturers,  showing  how 
the  profits  from  industry  were  greater  than  from  agricul- 
ture, and  continued :  "  But,  after  having  admitted  all  this, 
the  cotton  planters  and  capitalists  of  the  South  raise  the 
inquiry :  Suppose  we  wished  to  go  into  the  manufacturing 
business,  though  we  had  plenty  of  raw  -material,  how  should 
we  obtain  the  labor  and  skill  qualified  for  the  work,  and  of 
both  of  which  we  are  deficient?"  This  conjectured  in- 
quiry, one  coming  naturally  from  owners  of  large  planta- 
tions worked  by  negro  slaves,  was  answered  without  hesita- 
tion :  "...  a  fine  supply  may  at  all  times  be  obtained,  in 
New  England,  to  manage  and  supervise  .  .  .  operations 
.  .  .  and  there  are  thousands  of  persons  at  the  South,  who 
would  gladly  and  gratefully  accept  such  employment  to 
earn  a  livelihood,  much  superior  to  that  which  their  present 
means  can  possibly  afford ;  and  would  quickly  become  qual- 
ified for  the  work  of  operatives,  under  the  charge  and 
direction  of  good  .  .  .  managers.  ...  In  a  comparatively 
short  period,  hundreds  of  factories  might  be  erected  and 
started  at  the  South,  and  fully  supplied  with  every  descrip- 
tion of  skill  and  labor  wanted."29 

Impossible  as  was  this  proposal  for  widespread  manu- 
facture of  cotton  at  the  South  at  the  time  it  was  made,  the 
prophesies  it  contained  were  realized,  when  finally  the  mills 
were  built,  with  remarkable  completeness.  Thus  thirty 
years  after  James  wrote,  the  president  of  the  Louisville 
and  Nashville  Railroad  was  able  to  say  in  a  Northern 
paper :  "  Mills  for  the  weaving  of  the  coarser  cotton  fabrics 
are  now  in  successful  operation  in  Tennessee,  Georgia,  Ken- 
tucky and  several  of  the  Atlantic  coast  States.  .  .  .  The 
labor  question  in  the  South,  which  a  few  years  ago  pre- 
sented many  difficulties,  is  now  as  practically  settled  there 

29  James,  in  DeBow,  vol.  i,  p.  233  ff . 
12 


I78  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [284 

as  in  any  other  portion  of  the  land.  The  class  formerly 
known  as  'poor  whites'  are  mixing  and  assimilating  with 
their  more  fortunate  neighbors.  They  are  making  good 
workers  in  mine  and  field,  good  operatives  in  factories. 
.  .  ."30  It  was  stated  in  1880  that  within  a  few  months  five 
hundred  white  North  Carolinians  had  left  the  State  to  seek 
homes  in  the  West,  and  that  the  movement  was  increasing. 
The  number  of  emigrants  with  sufficient  energy  and  means 
to  go  far  away  did  not  need  to  be  large  to  indicate  that  there 
was  a  surplus  of  labor.31 

The  Atlanta  correspondent  of  the  New  York  Times,  de- 
scribing the  cotton  mill  campaign  in  the  South,  said  that 
"  there  is  an  abundance  of  native  white  labor  to  be  had  at 
from  50  to  60  cents  a  day " ;  explained  that  while  negroes 
had  not  been  proved  entirely  unsuitable  for  the  work, — 
"  there  are  white  men  and  women  enough  for  all  present 
demands," — and  continued:  "Of  the  many  benefits  which 
the  community  at  large,  as  distinguished  from  the  capitalist 
and  manufacturer,  will  enjoy  from  the  extension  of  manu- 
factures in  the  South,  the  chief  one  will  be  the  opportunity 
afforded  for  the  profitable  employment  of  thousands  of 
hands  now  idle."  White  labor  must  yield  to  black  in  cotton 
growing  and  in  the  less  skilled  trades.  "  Shut  out  in  so 
many  directions  the  whites,  who  now  find  life  a  bitter  strug- 
gle, will  gladly  turn  to>  the  spindle  and  loom  as  a  means  of 
gaining  a  livelihood.  Manufacturing  will  be  their  deliver- 
ance. .  .  .  For  girls  and  women  who  have  hitherto  had  no 
Opportunity  to  earn  money  the  establishment  of  factories  in 
every  town  and  village  will  be  an  incalculable  blessing."32 

30  Quoted  from  New  York  Herald  in  News  and  Courier,  Charles- 
ton, July  11,  1 881.  By  1888  the  abundant  supply  of  labor  in  South 
Carolina  was  not  only  recognized  in  the  State  itself  as  an  asset,  but 
was  advertised  as  such  to  manufacturers  who  might  be  considering 
locating  there,  the  State  department  of  agriculture  publishing  that 
"  the  manufacturer  of  cotton  goods  finds  ...  a  population  willing 
and  anxious  for  employment,  out  of  which  can  be  made  as  intelli- 
gent, skillful  and  reliable  operatives  as  are  to  be  found  anywhere  " 
(South  Carolina  Department  of  Agriculture,  Sketch  of  Industrial 
Resources  of  S.  C,  1888,  p.  27). 

31  Concord  Sun,  quoted  in  Observer,  Raleigh,  Feb.  24,  1880. 

32  Quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Nov.  5,  1881.    How 


285] 


THE   LABOR   FACTOR  1 79 


From  one  of  the  new  cotton  mill  localities  in  1881  came 
the  following,  which  has  the  distinctive  flavor  of  the  times : 

Not  only  should  there  be  different  kinds  of  crops,  but  we  ought 
to  have  other  ways  of  securing  a  livelihood  besides  farming.  There 
ought  to  be  other  kinds  of  work  furnished  the  girls  of  the  State 
besides  housekeeping.  The  factories  that  are  springing  up  over  the 
country  will  help  them  a  great  deal.  Here  is  a  factory  established 
at  Piedmont  which  will  give  employment  to  six  hundred  persons, 
half  of  whom  will  be  girls.  But  we  need  others.  There  is  a  man 
here  now  from  Edgefield  who  has  a  family  of  six  girls  and  who  has 
come  here  to  get  them  work  in  the  Piedmont  factory.  But  he  is 
too  late.  Every  house  in  the  place  has  been  engaged  and  there  are 
twenty  families  that  have  applied  for  positions,  but  have  been  re- 
fused because  they  are  not  needed.  Four  families  of  thirty  persons 
have  moved  in  since  yesterday. 

Many  who  were  not  idle  or  even,  perhaps,  exactly  "  mar- 
ginal "  producers,  came  to  the  mills,  thus  increasing  the  vis- 
ible labor  supply.  It  was  said  that  "  as  soon  as  the  crops  are 
gathered  all  the  others  that  have  secured  places  will  move 
here.  The  population  at  present  is  over  one  thousand  and 
it  will  be  1,500  in  two  months.  There  are  more  carpenters 
and  mechanics  employed  here  now  than  at  any  past  time. 
.  .  .  240  rooms  are  being  plastered."33 

little  conditions  in  the  South  varied  from  one  locality  to  another, 
how  universal  were  the  causes  which  underlay  its  economic,  plight, 
are  instanced  on  every  hand.  Places  outside  the  South  were  more 
likely  to  possess  peculiar  economic  characteristics.  Thus  a  Philadel- 
phia textile  journal  remarked  that  "Baltimore  .  .  .  offers  some  of 
the  best  advantages  for  starting  manufacturing  establishments  of 
any  point  in  the  United  States.  .  .  .  Labor  is  plenty  and  cheap,  there 
being  a  great  number  of  females  who  are  employed  during  the  pack- 
ing season,  which  lasts  but  a  short  time;  the  balance  of  which  they 
eke  out  a  miserable  existence  by  sewing."  Here  was  a  purely  local 
circumstance  (Philadelphia  Hosiery  and  Knit  Goods  Manufacturer, 
quoted  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers' 
Record,  July  15,  1882). 

33  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Oct.  21,  1881.  The  son  of  the 
founder  of  this  mill  told  the  writer  that  "  there  was  no  opposition 
among  the  country  people  against  the  mills.  At  Piedmont  in  the 
early  days  it  was  impossible  to  give  employment  to  all  that  offered 
themselves"  (James  D.  Hammett,  int.,  Anderson).  The  rush  to 
hastily  constructed  mill  villages,  though  from  a  local  region,  was 
much  like  the  lightning  growth  of  gold  towns  in  California  and 
Alaska,  and,  more  recently,  at  munition  plants.  Of  the  Clifton  mill 
in  South  Carolina  it  was  said  that  "  there  are  families  coming  in 
constantly  and  the  cottages  as  fast  as  completed  are  occupied,  and 
still  they  come"  (News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Oct.  21,  1881). 
There  were  many  reasons  for  a  large  proportion  of  women  and  girls 


180  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [286 

Of  operatives  proper  in  Southern  mills,  the  census  of 
1870  showed  that  women  comprised  41.2  per  cent.  In 
1880  the  percentage  was  49.4,  but  by  1890  it  had  receded 
again  to  40.6.  In  the  New  England  mills,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  proportion  of  women  in  all  classes  of  employes 
was  a  little  higher  in  1890  than  in  1880 — 49.4  per  cent  as 
against  49.2  per  cent.  In  Southern  mills  the  percentage  of 
children  decreased  slightly  between  1880  and  1890 — from 
24.5  to  23.7,  whereas  in  New  England  the  proportion  of 
children  fell  away  greatly  in  the  decade — from  13.9  to  6.8 
per  cent.  In  the  South  the  percentage  of  men  increased 
from  30.2  to  35.6,  and  in  New  England  from  36.8  to  43.7. 
Thus  in  New  England  mills,  decrease  in  the  proportion  of 
children  was  accompanied  by  an  increase  in  percentage  of 
men,  but  also  by  some  increase  in  percentage  of  women.  In 
the  South,  on  the  other  hand,  a  slight  reduction  in  propor- 
tion of  children  was  coincident  with  an  increase  in  the  pro- 
portion of  men  and  a  correspondingly  sharp  fall  in  propor- 
tion of  women.  In  New  England  there  was  a  relative 
elimination  of  children,  and  in  the  South  of  women.34 

in  the  ranks  of  those  who  applied  to  the  cotton  mills  for  employ- 
ment. Elsewhere  the  effect  of  the  Civil  War  in  reducing  the  number 
of  men  and  boys  and  in  crippling  others  is  noted.  It  was  less  easy 
for  females  to  compete  with  colored  labor  than  for  males,  not  only 
from  physical  but  from  social  causes.  The  cotton  factories  offered 
a  field  from  which  negroes  were  excluded.  The  work  was  light  and 
suited  to  deft  fingers.  What  applied  to  women  and  girls  was  true 
in  slightly  less  degree  of  young  boys. 

34  The  percentage  of  women  in  Southern  mills  in  1880  is  taken 
from  absolute  figures  in  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1880  (Cotton 
Manufacture,  by  Edward  Atkinson,  pp.  15-16),  and  is  higher  than 
that  given  in  the  census  of  1800  (Cotton  Manufacture,  by  Edward 
Stanwood,  p.  173) — 45.3 — in  which  all  classes  of  employes,  and  not 
simply  operatives,  were  included.  Obviously,  office  force  and  "  out- 
side" help  would  include  few  women.  Other  percentages  approxi- 
mated in  the  fractions  are  from  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1890, 
ibid.  The  trend  pointed  out  above  may  be  seen  more  clearly  by 
taking  the  year  1900  into  consideration.  Between  1890  and  1900  the 
number  of  children  in  New  England  mills  increased  8.7  per  cent ; 
women  1.89;  and  men  23.9.  In  the  South  the  number  of  children 
made  a  gain  of  177  per  cent;  women  125;  and  men  223  per  cent 
(percentages  from  absolute  figures  in  U,  S.  Census  of  Manufactures, 
1900).  Of  course,  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  number  of  all 
employes  in  Southern  mills  was  greatly  increasing  after  1880.    In 


287J  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  l8l 

In  the  South  and  in  New  England  the  cotton  industry,  in 
respect  to  labor,  has  eased  itself  at  the  points  of  relatively 
greatest  strain.  In  the  South  this  meant  proportionate  de- 
crease in  number  of  women  employed;  in  New  England  it 
meant  decrease  in  relative  number  of  children.  If  it  is 
borne  in  mind  that  in  the  South  there  was  first  great  pres- 
sure for  employment,  changing  gradually  to  insistent  de- 
mand for  workers,  distinction  in  alteration  of  proportions 
of  operatives  in  the  two  sections  is  not  difficult  to  account 
for.  In  the  South  in  the  beginning  everybody  was  eager 
for  work,  and  women  seemed  better  suited  to  take  hold  of 
an  industrial  task  than  children;  later,  when  the  fullest 
numbers  were  needed,  the  nature  of  factory  work  was 
familiar,  and  more  children  could  go  into  the  mills  if 
mothers  worked  at  home.35 

Census  figures  are  borne  out  roughly  by  many  references 
that  may  be  found  relative  to  labor  in  the  mills  at  the  outset 
of  the  period.  Thus  two-thirds  of  the  operatives  at  Lang- 
ley  were  female  (girls  included  with  women)  in  1880,  and 
it  was  reported  of  Graniteville  and  Vaucluse  that  "the 
number  of  operatives  employed  is  775 ;  two-thirds  of  whom 
are  females  and  who  range  from  11  years  up."36  In  a  fac- 
tory at  Selma,  Alabama,  "the  operatives  number  120,  mostly 
women  and  children,  taken  from  Selma  and  vicinity."37 

The  prevailing  low  rate  of  wages,  as  also  variations  in 
wages  between  one  mill  and  another,  may  be  taken  as  indi- 
cations that  labor  was  in  abundant  supply.    An  examination 

1850  and  i860  the  number  of  women  was  about  the  same — 6157  and 
6039.  In  1870  there  were  4190,  in  1880  there  were  7587,  and  in  1890 
there  were  15,083  (ibid.). 

35  Edward  Stanwood  (Cotton  Manufacture,  p.  33,  in  U.  S.  Census 
of  Manufactures,  1900),  was  mistaken  in  neglecting  these  considera- 
tions. "  Whole  families  in  that  region,"  he  said,  meaning  the  South, 
"  enter  the  factories,  because  in  no  other  way  can  the  demand  for 
labor  be  satisfied.  Consequently  the  changes  in  the  proportion  of 
men,  women  and  children  employed  are  largely  fortuitous."  On  the 
face  of  it,  his  statement  is  unfortunate,  because  taking  together  great 
numbers  of  families  entering  the  mills,  a  statistical  trend  would 
easily  show  itself;  moreover,  after  a  family  has  been  in  the  mill  a 
while,  some  members  may  discontinue  the  factory  employment. 

36  Blackman,  pp.  7  and  4. 

37  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March  31,  1881. 


1 82  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        £288 

of  newspaper  files  covering  the  opening  years  of  the  cotton 
mill  period  failed1  to  disclose  a  single  advertisement  for 
operatives.  When  it  is  remembered1  that  factories  sprang 
in  great  numbers  and  simultaneously  from  an  agricultural 
regime,  this  is  striking.38 

An  article  summarizing  a  newspaper  correspondent's 
study  of  the  South  Carolina  cotton  mills  in  1880  declared 
that  "  the  difficulty  in  obtaining  operatives  is  not  great,  it 
seems.  Indeed  no  new  industry  has  ever  been  adopted  with 
less  difficulty,  and  with  fewer  drawbacks  and  discourage- 
ment [sic],  than  the  business  of  manufacturing  cotton  in 
South  Carolina."39  There  appeared  to  be  no  apprehension 
about  getting  operatives  for  the  largest  plants.  Thus  the 
King  mill  at  Augusta  in  1883  began  production  confidently. 
"The  first  beam  was  taken  off  the  slasher  Wednesday 
morning  ...  at  10.30  o'clock,  and  the  first  loom  was 
started  Wednesday  afternoon  at  3  o'clock.  Last  evening 
there  were  fifty-three  looms  running.  Supt.  Smith  reports 
that  so  far  he  has  had  no  trouble  getting  hands,  and  does 
not  anticipate  trouble  in  this  direction."40 

38  It  is  true,  of  course,  that  newspapers  were  then  not  so  widely 
read  as  now,  and  did  not  reach  to  very  large  extent  the  people  who 
were  attracted  to  the  mills.  Many  of  the  first  mills  were  from  the 
start  operated  at  night,  which  required  a  double  force  of  hands. 
Thus  more  mills  than  were  built  might  have  sprung  up  and  had  labor 
to  run  during  the  day,  without  exhausting  the  labor  supply,  providing 
the  conclusion  reached  in  this  study,  that  workers  were  plentiful 
without  respect  to  locality,  is  correct.  For  example :  "  Quite  a  num- 
ber of  Mr.  Cornelson's  new  factory  hands  have  already  arrived  at 
Orangeburg,  and  the  mill  is  now  being  run  at  night"  (News  and 
Courier,  Charleston,  April  9,  1881). 

38  Leading  article,  in  Blackman.  The  article  was  probably  written 
by  F.  W.  Dawson,  editor  of  the  News  and  Courier. 

40  Chronicle,  Augusta,  Nov.  11,  1883.  The  first  president  of  this 
mill  told  the  writer  that  the  factory  "  got  plenty  of  help  right  here 
locally,  all  natives  "  (Charles  Estes,  int.,  Augusta).  A  factory  which 
had  its  start  before  the  cotton  mill  campaign  was  in  every  sense  a 
local  enterprise.  Its  operatives  were  described  as  being  "  all  natives, 
with  one  exception,  who  have  been  educated  to  the  business.  This 
class  of  labor  is  very  readily  obtained  from  the  surrounding  coun- 
try" (Blackman,  p.  10).  Speaking  of  the  beginnings  of  the  cotton 
mill  South,  a  commission  merchant  who  has  been  intimately  iden- 
tified with  the  development  said  that  "  labor  was  superabundant  and 
very  cheap"  (Summerfield  Baldwin,  int.,  Baltimore). 


289]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  1 83 

The  superintendent  of  the  Langley  factory  stated  that 
"labor  was  very  plentiful  and  that  they  could  get  20  per 
cent  more  than  was  required  to  run  the  mill.  The  .  .  . 
operatives  are  made  up  entirely  of  the  people  born  and 
raised  right  in  the  vicinity."41  An  old  man  who  saw  the 
founding,  of  the  mills1  said  that  the  availability  of  a  labor 
supply  did  not  form  a  strong  motive  in  the  locating  of  fac- 
tories, for  there  was  never  any  difficulty  about  getting 
operatives.42 

A  superintendent  in  another  State  gave  similar  testimony : 
"Proximity  to  a  labor  supply  was  not  considered  in  the 
location  of  (mills  early  in  the  period.  There  was  plenty  of 
labor  at  first."  Mr.  Tompkins,  explaining  what  he  consid- 
ered the  corrective  results  of  manufactures  protected  by  a 
tariff,  gave  a  little  picture  of  the  South  that  had  been  famil- 
iar: "You  all  know  that  fifteen  and  twenty  years  ago  we 
did  have  an  army  of  unemployed.  .  .  .  Any  town  in  those 
old  days  presented  a  street  spectacle  of  listless  loafers, 
white  and  black,  leaning  against  the  door  facings,  telegraph 
poles  and  sitting  on  boxes.  Even  the  dogs  caught  the  list- 
less spirit  and  didn't  get  up  to  bark."43 

41  Blackman,  p.  7. 

42  Charles  McDonald,  int.,  Charlotte. 

43  American  Cotton  Manufacture  and  the  Tariff,  p.  9.  For  the 
Arista  Mills,  at  Winston-Salem,  the  attempt  was  made  to  get  skilled 
operatives  from  other  factory  communities,  but  this  proved  expen- 
sive and  unnecessary,  because  many  in  an  already  floating  population 
offered  experienced  services  and  others  came  in  sufficient  numbers 
(John  W.  Fries,  int.,  Winston-Salem).  It  will  be  seen  later  that 
labor  continued  in  abundance  for  a  good  many  years  following  1880. 
Tompkins,  whose  largeness  of  view  is  not  often  to  be  interpreted  as 
exaggeration,  thought  the  South  had  enough  idle  people  to  fill  fac- 
tories that  would  drive  England  and  Germany  out  of  world  markets 
(Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  p.  177).  He  argued  that  "Those 
who  know  the  existing  conditions  will  probably  not  dissent  from  the 
opinion  that  it  would  be  easy  to  put  1,000,000  people  to  work  manu- 
facturing cotton,  and  never  miss  them  from  present  employments. 
Estimating  12,000,000  out  of  the  entire  population  as  being  white 
people,  even  from  amongst  these,  a  million  could  be  more  than  easily 
spared"  (ibid.,  p.  20 ff.  There  is  much  in  this  reference  to  show 
how  cotton  mills  in  the  South  took  up  slack  in  the  available  working 
force  and  improved  conditions  of  urban  and  rural  communities). 
In  1900  Tompkins  believed  night  work  was  necessary  if  all  of  the 
mill  people  were  to  be  kept  in  jobs.     "  The  night  work  in  cotton  mills 


184  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [29O 

Having  seen  how  generally  willing  the  people  were  to 
offer  themselves  for  work  in  the  cotton  mills  tor  a  long 
period  after  the  first  establishment  of  the  industry  in  the 
South,  it  may  next  be  shown  from  what  localities  labor 
was  drawn,  what  were  the  immediate  and  what  the  second- 
ary regions  of  supply.  Before  speaking  of  the  migrations 
to  the  mills  from  districts  just  surrounding  them,  however, 
incidental  notice  might  be  taken  of  the  fact  that  farmers' 
daughters  frequently  embraced  temporary  employment  in 
the  little  neighborhood  mills  running  before  the  Civil  War. 
They  wanted  to  make  money  to  buy  trousseaux  or  to  help 
their  families,  but  they  did  not  intend  to  become  factory 
workers.  They  perhaps  walked  to  and  from  the  mill  morn- 
ing and  evening,  or,  if  their  homes  were  at  an  inconvenient 
distance,  might  live  with  a  friend  near  the  factory.  These 
conditions  prevailed  with  respect  to  five  mills  on  Deep  River 
in  a  Quaker  community  in  North  Carolina  prior  to  1850. 
This  was  not  considered  menial  service,  and  the  young 
women  often  married  officials  in  the  mills.  The  custom  was 
roughly  that  of  farmers'  daughters  in  parts  of  the  South 
today,  who  work  in  canneries  in  their  neighborhoods  a  few 
weeks  in  the  summer.4*  This  practice  had  nothing  to  do 
with  the  readiness  with  which  an  agricultural  population 
entered  factories  from  1880  forward. 

It  is  difficult,  speaking  for  the  majority  of  cases,  to  agree 
with  the  statement  of  Mr.  Copeland  relative  to  the  smaller 
Southern  factories  that  "  frequently  a  mill  was  established 
in  an  out  of  the  way  place  so  as  to  employ  workmen  who 
were  not  willing  to  move  but  would  work  for  low  wages 

is  better  than  any  other  work  the  operatives  can  get  now  or  they 
wouldn't  take  it.  It  would  be  a  hardship  to  close  all  the  mills  at 
night  and  throw  all  these  people  at  once  out  of  regular  employment " 
(Labor  Legislation,  p.  4).  Mr.  Thompson  thought  it  necessary  to 
state  in  1906  that  "  the  difference  [in  wages]  in  favor  of  the  factory 
is  so  great  that  only  the  natural  inertia  of  a  rural  population  com- 
bined with  certain  social  disadvantages  of  factory  labor  prevents  an 
over-supply"  of  operatives  (p.  274). 

44  Cf.  Thompson,  p.  51  ff.  With  reference  to  similar  conditions  in 
cotton  mills  in  New  England  at  about  the  same  period,  see  Cope- 
land,  p.  12. 


291]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  185 

near  their  homes."45  There  were  instances  in  which  the 
proximity  of  a  labor  supply  was  a  factor  in  determining  the 
location  of  a  mill,  but  with  these  comparatively  rare  estab- 
lishments, the  thought  was  that  the  plant  would  be  closer 
to  prospective  hands  than  other  mills,  would  be  in  the  path 
of  an  efflux  of  labor.  In  hardly  any  case  could  the  people 
do  otherwise  than  move  their  homes  to  the  village  provided 
by  the  factory,  or  to  the  town  in  which  the  factory  was 
located.  They  usually  knew  that  they  were  divorcing  them- 
selves from  the  soil.  The  mills  went  to  the  labor  only  in 
the  sense  that  they  competed  for  positions  convenient  to  a 
general  labor  supply.  It  is  said  that  cotton  manufactures 
were  located  at  Anderson,  South  Carolina,  partly  because 
the  place  is  only  about  thirty  miles  from  cheap  labor  in  the 
mountains,  but  workers  came  to  this  mill  first  from  the 
close  neighborhood,  and  afterwards  from  the  mountains.46 

It  is  true  that  sometimes  the  prejudices  of  the  people  and 
their  local  ignorances  assisted  a  mill  placed  near  them.  A 
superintendent  who  has  had  experience  in  soliciting  labor 
for  a  large  mill  in  a  city  said  that  "a  new  operative  from 
the  country  naturally  goes  to  a  country  mill.  These  people 
look  on  Spartanburg  as  I  would  look  on  New  York  City,  as 
a  great  big  corrupt  assemblage  of  humanity  where  folks 
can't  raise  their  children  right."47  But  the  people  who  went 
to  the  mills  had  decided  to  become  operatives,  and  if  coun- 
try families  sought  country  mills,  these  might  have  been  at 
a  greater  or  shorter  distance  from  their  homes  without  con- 
siderably influencing  their  willingness  to  seek  the  industrial 
employment. 

Ordinarily,  "  it  was  possible  then  to  locate  a  mill  almost 
anywhere  and  strike  a  labor  supply."48  Labor  was  so  abun- 
dant that  it  was  an  advantage,  rather  than  an  object. 

It  has  been  suggested  to  the  writer  that  the  cotton  mill  era 
in  the  South  was  made  possible  by  the  pushing  of  railroads 

45  Cotton  Manufacturing  Industry  of  U.  S.  (p.  143). 

46  J.  A.  Brock,  int.,  Anderson,  S.  C,  Sept.  11,  1916. 

47  W.  J.  Britton,  int.,  Spartanburg,  S.  C,  Sept.  5,  1916. 

48  C.  S.  Morris,  int.,  Salisbury,  N.  C,  Sept.  1,  1916. 


1 86  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [292 

up  to  the  mountains,  thus  tapping  pools  of  labor  that  flowed 
down  into  the  Piedmont  and  lower  country.  Perhaps  three 
considerations  have  prompted  the  thought:  first,  that  cheap 
labor  certainly  contributed  largely  to  the  success  of  the  fac- 
tories at  the  outset;  second,  that  there  was  an  important 
period  of  railroad  building  in  the  South  Atlantic  States 
just  before  and  during  the  years  in  which  the  cotton  fac- 
tories were  erected;  third,  that  many  operatives  came  from 
the  mountains.  The  number  of  mountaineers  and  "  hill 
people"  in  the  mill  population  of  the  South  is  large,  but 
the  curiously  prevalent  impression  that  all  factory  opera- 
tives were  drawn  from  mountainous  districts  is  mistaken. 
Labor  in  the  years  of  the  rise  of  cotton  mills  was  scat- 
tered; it  was  available  in  nearly  every  part  of  the  South; 
it  was  not  dammed  up  in  the  mountains  alone.  It  will  be 
seen  that  the  people  came  to  the  mills  first  from  districts 
immediately  surrounding  the  plants.  Wagons  carrying  the 
entire  household  goods  of  the  new  help  formed  the  means 
of  conveyance.  After  a  good  many  mills  had  supplied  foci 
for  the  labor  of  their  localities  and  some  operatives  had 
been  trained,  labor  begun  to  be  a  little  fluid.  Workpeople 
moved  from  mill  to  mill.  As  more  factories  were  estab- 
lished, the  populations  of  more  sections  were  attracted  to 
industrial  life,  the  total  body  of  operatives  became  larger, 
the  distance  from  one  plant  to  another  was  less,  informa- 
tion as  to  comparative  conditions  in  mill  villages  was  more 
easily  obtained,  and  there  developed  what  has  been  called 
"  the  floating  element."  But  this  mobile  element,  it  is  to  be 
noted,  was  composed  of  cotton  mill  operatives,  and  not  of 
people  just  from  the  land.49     Not  until  late  in  the  history 

49  "  Railroads  to  the  mountains  did  not  tap  pools  of  labor.  There 
was  not  much  floating  or  flowing  of  labor  until  the  mills  had  been 
long  established"  (Charles  McDonald,  int.,  Charlotte).  President 
Baldwin,  of  the  Louisville  and  Nashville  Railroad,  in  the  interview 
in  the  New  York  Herald  already  quoted,  spoke  of  the  part  of  the 
railroads  in  opening  up  a  future  for  the  South  and  dwelt  at  some 
length  upon  the  poor  whites  and  their  entrance  into  the  factories, 
but  did  not  mention  any  assistance  of  railroads  in  forming  an  outlet 
for  pent-up  labor  supplies.  Cf.  George  B.  Cowlan,  The  Undeveloped 
South.     Search  has  failed  to  reveal  a  case  in  which,  among  the  many 


293^  THE   LABOR   FACTOR  1 87 

of  the  Southern  mills,  as  will  be  pointed  out  in  more  detail 
presently,  did  establishments  get  fresh  labor  from  any  dis- 
tance, and  in  these  cases  the  stimulus  to  move  came  from 
the  mills,  not  from  the  people.  The  iron  filings  had  no 
greater  impulse  to  move  to  the  magnet  than  formerly ;  more 
power  had  to  be  given  to  the  attractive  force.  The  mills 
had  been  building  a  good  many  years  before  it  was  neces- 
sary for  them  to  solicit  labor,  and  it  proved  hard  work.50 

Labor  from  the  mountains  came  a  greater  distance,  per- 
haps, than  that  from  the  farming  districts,  but  this  was 
because  there  were  no  mills  right  in  the  mountains.  It  was 
essentially  local,  just  as  much  as  was  the  tenant  labor.51 

For  the  Westminster  Mill,  in  South  Carolina,  a  very 
small  affair  owned  by  cotton  planters,  "  the  operatives  con- 
sisted of  seven  young  girls  of  the  neighborhood  who  had 
never  seen  a  cotton  factory  and  one  skilled  operator,  who 
trained  them  and  attended  to  the  card."52  So  far  from 
bringing  labor  to  mills,  railroads  may  rather  be  said  to  have 
brought  mills  to  labor.  A  newspaper  correspondent  wrote 
from  the  Piedmont :  "  Six  years  ago  the  country  now  trav- 
ersed by  the  Air  Line  Railroad  was  an  almost  unbroken 
wilderness.  There  were  few  people,  little  energy  and  no 
progress.     Now  there  are  towns  and  villages1  all  along  the 

reasons  urged  for  extending  small  up-country  branch  lines,  that  of 
releasing  needed  labor  figured. 

50  Cf.  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1900,  Cotton  Manufacture, 
p.  30.  Even  at  this  time,  when  the  industry  was  "  growing  at  a  won- 
derful rate,"  the  report  was  that  "  the  help  employed  is  chiefly  local." 

51  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  very  recently,  since  hands  have 
become  scarce,  a  tendency  to  erect  mills  actually  in  the  mountains 
has  shown  itself. 

52  Blackman,  p.  18.  In  this  instance  the  operatives  must  have  lived 
at  their  fathers'  places,  but  this  was  unusual.  The  local  character 
of  the  labor  supply  is  frequently  indicated  in  the  provision  made  for 
the  operatives'  homes  and  general  living — poor  people  from  the 
vicinity  came  to  and  snuggled  up  against  the  mills  like  chicks  under 
the  protecting  wings  of  the  mother  hen.  The  villages  were  like 
medieval  hamlets  clustered  about  a  fortified  castle.  The  factory  was 
the  provider.  An  officer  of  a  small  establishment  which  commenced 
operation  in  the  seventies  said :  "  Our  labor  is  composed  entirely  of 
natives  who  have  been  educated  to  the  business.  They  are  very 
comfortably  located,  and  have  the  free  use  of  all  the  wood  they 
require"  (ibid.,  p.  8).  The  same  had  been  true  of  the  older  Granite- 
ville  factory  all  along  (cf.  ibid.,  p.  55). 


1 88  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [294 

route,  and  the  back  country  is  rapidly  being  occupied  by  a 
thrifty  and  industrious  population.  In  Pickens  County,  at 
Greenville  and  in  Spartanburg,  cotton  factories  have  been 
built.  .  .  .  One  hundred  hands  are  now  employed  in  the 
factory  [Clifton],  and,  when  the  mill  is  finished,  this  num- 
ber will  be  increased  to  four  hundred.  The  employes,  with 
the  exception  of  the  superintendents  in  the  various  depart- 
ments, are  all  natives;  there  are  no  others  on  the  pay  rolls 
of  the  company."53  In  an  account  of  the  Huguenot  factory, 
in  the  same  State,  it  was  said  that  "  in  the  operation  of  the 
mill  home  labor  is  employed,  the  weavers  being  principally 
native  women  and  girls,  who  with  application  soon  become 
proficient  in  the  art  of  operating  the  looms."54 

One  evidence  of  the  local  origin  of  operatives  and  mill 
projectors  alike  was  the  mutual  respect  prevailing  between 
management  and  workpeople.  The  owners  of  cotton  mills 
did  not  look  down  upon  their  employes.  They  might  and 
usually  did  recognize  that  the  operatives  were  lacking  in 
education,  thrift,  energy  and  property,  and  they  applied 
themselves  to  alleviate  these  conditions,  but  always  there 
was  the  knowledge  that  employer  and  employe  were  of  the 
same  origin,  the  same  blood,  and,  not  remotely,  the  same 
instincts.  After-war  struggles  brought  an  intimacy  through 
propinquity  which  in  earlier  years  had  been  impossible. 
Men  who  were  active  in  the  opening  of  the  cotton  mill  era 
in  the  South  resent  any  suggestion,  recognizing  in  it  a  slur 
somehow  upon  themselves,  that  the  operatives  were  in- 
ferior people.55 

53  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  May  21,  1881. 

54  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
Oct.  28,  1882. 

55  A  very  elderly  gentleman,  characteristic  of  the  best  the  old 
South  produced,  had  no  sympathy  with  writers  who  are  free  in 
forming  theories  about  the  South,  or  who  wish  to  make  Southern 
problems  seem  distinctive.  "  Where  did  the  first  labor  for  the 
Greensboro  mills  come  from?"  he  was  asked.  "  From  the  mountain 
sections?"  He  replied  with  scorn:  "That's  all  stuff!  Magazine 
writers  and  such  people,  magazine  writers,  I  say,  come  down  here 
and  spread  such  statements.  The  people  came  from  right  'round 
here — some  from  this  county,  some  from  counties  adjoining  this. 
They  were  no  paupers,  either.    They  were  the  best  kind  of  people. 


295]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  1 89 

The  remarkable  story  of  the  Salisbury  Mills,  born  in  a 
religious  and  philanthropic  impulse,  has  been  told  in  a 
previous  chapter.  It  goes  without  saying  that  this  factory 
"  was  built  for  the  home  people,"  and  it  is  interesting  that 
the  managers  "  never  had  anybody  else  in  it."56 

For  the  Kershaw  mill,  "the  employes  came  from  right 
around  Kershaw  and  are  good  citizens."57  In  many  mills 
early  conditions  are  reflected  today.  The  Shelby  Cotton 
Mill,  it  is  recently  reported,  "  employs  .  .  .  about  three 
hundred  operatives.  They  are  ...  in  most  cases  native 
Cleveland  county  stock — good  old  Scotch-Irish  and  similar 
blood  lines,"58  and  it  is  said  of  the  small  Indian  Creek  Mill : 
"It  gives  employment  to  about  sixty  operatives  and  these 
workmen  are  native  Lincoln  county  people."59 

Proximity  was  the  chief  determining  factor  in  the  source 
of  labor.  If  there  were  not  enough  people  in  the  immediate 
vicinity  of  a  mill  in  the  Piedmont  to  fill  its  needs,  some 
operatives  would  be  recruited  from  the  higher  country  a 
little   distance    away.      Thus    of    the    Spartanburg    mills: 

They  went  into  the  mills  because  it  was  a  new  thing,  you  know,  and 
looked  like  a  good  thing."  Asked  then,  "  What  did  they  do  before 
going  into  the  mills,"  he  replied :  "  Farmed !  [with  emphasis,  as 
though  anyone  should  know  that].  Worked  their  farms!  'Course, 
many  of  them  didn't  own  their  places,  were  tenants.  They  helped 
themselves  by  going  to  the  mills — got  schools  now  and  all  that." 
This  statement  is  mistaken  in  excluding  the  attraction  of  labor  from 
the  mountains,  and  overdraws  the  propertied  character  of  the  first 
operatives,  but  is  significant  in  spirit.  Though  recognition  was 
granted  the  poor  whites  belatedly,  it  was  generous  when  it  came 
(James  Moorehead,.  int.,  Greensboro). 

56  O.  D.  Davis,  int.,  Salisbury.  Operatives  came  from  within  a 
radius  of  twenty-five  miles  (C.  S.  .Morns,  int.,  Salisbury).  Cf. 
Charlotte  News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917,  with  reference  to  this  estab- 
lishment. 

57  Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  191-6. 

58  Charlotte  News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917. 

59  Ibid.  Instances  are  easily  multiplied.  Cf.,  respecting  Clyde, 
Carolina,  Great  Falls,  Raleigh,  and  Bladenboro  mills,  ibid. ;  for  ex- 
ample, "  The  greater  part  of  the  employes  in  these  mills,  particu- 
larly the  older  ones,  came  to  the  mills  from  the  territory  surrounding 
Rockingham.  Many  of  them  came  from  tenant  farms  where  a 
year's  livelihood  was  earned  by  the  proverbial  sweat  of  the  brow, 
and  much  of  it"  (ibid.).  Cf.  also  Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed., 
1916. 


I9O  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [[296 

"  Labor  first  came  from  this  immediate  section,  supple-^ 
merited  by  people  from  the  mountains  and  foothills."60 

A  great  many  workpeople  for  a  South  Carolina  mill  lo- 
cated in  the  country  came  from  the  four  surrounding  coun- 
ties, but  "  another  big  body  of  the  new  help  came  from  the 
mountains  of  western  North  Carolina."61 

A  woman  who  had  been  president  of  the  Batesville  fac- 
tory, in  South  Carolina,  gave  an  interpretative  account  of 
the  commencement  of  the  mill  period.  "  The  section  was 
desperately  poor,"  she  said.  "  The  village  of  Greenville 
would  have  been  called  in  the  foothills.  Farming  returned 
hardly  anything  to  put  in  the  farmers'  mouths.  There 
were  women  and  girls — many  more  women  than  men,  be- 
cause the  war  had  taken  the  men — whose  lives  were  empty. 
The  'mills  opened  a  vista  before  these;  it  was  like  finding  a 
mine,  you  know.  Most  of  the  mills  got  local  labor.  In  1880 
Camperdown,  say,  could  draw  no  labor  within  a  radius  of 
half  a  dozen  miles.  This  was  also  true  of  Batesville  a  few 
years  later,  before  labor  came  from  the  foothills  of  the 
mountains.  .  .  .  After  ten  or  fifteen  years  the  labor  of  the 
localities  was  exhausted,  and  it  was  necessary  to  send  to 
the  mountains."62  _,. 

It  will  be  noticed  presently  that  the  pull  of   the  field 

60  J.  A.  Chapman,  int.,  Spartanburg.  Of  a  knitting  mill  at  Union: 
"...  fifty  per  cent  of  the  operatives  are  natives  of  Piedmont  South 
Carolina,  the  others  from  the  mountains  of  North  Carolina  and  East 
Tennessee"  (Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  1916.  Cf.  ibid,  with 
reference  to  the  Ninety-Six  Mill,  and  Charlotte  News,  Textile  Ed., 
1917,  the  account  of  Rhyne's  establishments  in  Lincoln  County,  and 
such  mills  as  Marion  and  Mayworth). 

61  Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  1916.  A  newspaper  summary  of 
a  survey  as  late  as  1917  said :  "  Many  mills  will  be  found  where  there 
is  not  a  man  or  woman  employed  except  North  Carolinians.  .  .  . 
For  the  most  part  these  employes  come  from  the  territory  imme- 
diately surrounding  the  mills  with  additions  from  the  mountains  of 
the  State"  (Charlotte  News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917). 

62  Mrs.  M.  P.  Gridley,  int.,  Greenville.  Cf.  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of 
S.  C,  pp.  22-23.  A  Piedmont  manufacturer  said :  "  The  labor  at 
first  was  strictly  local.  Neighboring  farm  people  came,  probably 
from  the  same  township  or  school  district  with  that  in  which  the 
mill  was  situated.  Later  it  was  necessary  to  send  for  labor  from  a 
distance — North  Carolina  and  Tennessee.  Labor  at  first  was  local- 
ized and  did  not  move  much"  (J.  B.  Cleveland,  int.,  Spartanburg). 


297]]  THE   LABOR   FACTOR  I9I 

against  the  factory  has  tended  to  make  cotton  mill  labor  in 
recent  years  doubly  difficult  to  secure.  Not  only  have  those 
readily  willing  to  do  factory  work  been  drawn  to  the  mills, 
but  many  who  enter  the  mills  return,  to  the  farms.  This  is 
true  more  largely  of  tenant  help  than  of  mountain  people. 
When  the  family  pulls  up  stakes  in  the  mountains  and 
comes  down  to  a  mill  village,  the  temptation  to  leave  again 
is  not  so  strong  as  in  the  case  of  a  family  which  has  moved 
in  from  a  familiar  farm  a  few  miles  away.63 

In  rare  instances  mills  at  considerable  distance  from  the 
mountains  received  their  labor  primarily  from  the  moun- 
tain regions.  It  is  said  that  labor  did  not  come  to  the  Char- 
lotte mills  to  any  great  extent  from  the  adjoining  country, 
but  almost  entirely  from  the  mountains  or  foothills.  Even 
for  tenants,  the  farming  was  too  good  in  the  vicinity  of  the 
city  to  allow  mill  wages  to  tempt  them  away.64 

Before  proceeding  to  other  topics,  it  is  convenient  to 
speak  of  certain  instances  in  which  mills  found  difficulty  in 
securing  operatives.  Usually,  peculiar  local  circumstances 
were  responsible  for  the  inability  of  a  factory  to  provide 
itself  with  employes.  As  has  been  made  clear,  the  rule  was 
an  abundance  of  help. 

A  writer  who  lived  in  the  South  in  the  years  just  preced- 
ing the  first  years  of  mill  building  assumes  that  a  prime 
perplexity  of  the  mills  was  the  recruiting  of  operatives. 
Thus,  speaking  of  the  founding  oi  the  industry  in  South 
Carolina,  he  says :  "  .  .  .  the  money  had  to  be  raised,  largely 
with  the  assistance  of  the  North;  the  companies  formed, 
property  bought,  materials  secured,  homes  for  the  opera- 
tives constructed,  and  last  and  most  difficult  of  all,  em- 
ployees obtained."     He  quotes  approvingly  a  letter  of  an 

63  It  is  said  that  "  most  of  the  operatives  at  Kannapolis  (at  any 
rate  thirty  miles  from  the  mountains) — the  permanent  ones — come 
from  the  mountains.  A  good  many  come  in  from  the  surrounding 
farms  to  work  a  few  months,  and  then  go  back  to  the  farms"  (H. 
W.  Owen,  int.,  Kannapolis,  N.  C,  Jan.  6,  1917). 

64  "  If  you  will  trace  back  through  two  or  three  generations,  you 
will  find  that  75  per  cent  of  the  operatives  in  my  mill  are  descended 
from  people  who  came  from  the  mountains"  (Sterling  Graydon,  int., 
Charlotte). 


192  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [298 

Englishman  who  was  in  the  State  during  the  Civil  War, 
written  to  a  mill  president  in  1908,  saying  that  the  rise  of 
industry  from  agriculture  seemed  "all  the  more  extraordi- 
nary because  the  State  possesses  no  coal,  and  there  was  no 
superfluous  population  out  of  which  to  evolve  mill  hands." 
Paucity  of  labor  was  spoken  of  as  an  apparently  insur- 
mountable difficulty.65 

Probably  both  of  these  writers  meant  that  there  were  no 
laboring  people  accustomed  to  factory  employment,  that 
there  was  no  industrial  class  from  which  to  draw.66  It  will 
appear  later  that  in  a  good  many  important  instances,  the 
projectors  of  cotton  mills  in  the  eighties  failed  to  see  the 
opportunity  of  utilizing  the  labor  of,  the  poor  whites,  and 
looked  for  operatives  from  every  other  than  this  most 
plausible  source. 

Contemporary  estimates  of  facilities  for  establishing  a 
cotton  mill  rarely  voiced  any  doubt  on  the  head  of  labor.67 

If  any  cause  of  scarcity  of  help  may  be  termed  general, 
it  was  a  prejudice  against  factory  work  under  bosses  on  the 
part  of  persons  who  had  been,  in  however  poor  or  suppo- 
sititious a  fashion,  their  own  masters.  It  might  be  supposed 
that  objection  to  indoor  employment  and  life  in  a  mill  vil- 
lage would  be  frequent  with  people  with  rural  traditions. 
It  must  be  remembered,  however,  that,  their  farming  being 
at  lowest  ebb,  they  needed  to  take  desperate  remedies,  and, 
moreover,  dislike  of  a  mill  community  could  not  be  very 
strong  in  the   face   of   the  barrenness   of  country   living. 

65  Goldsmith,  p.  7. 

66  The  Englishman  concluded  with  the  question :  "  For  how  could 
anyone  see  that  the  water  power  of  the  Alleghanies  [Blue  Ridge] 
could  be  converted  into  electric  force,  or  that  you  could  turn  the 
clay-eating  Cracker  into  a  self-respecting  mill  hand?"  (ibid.).  Per- 
haps this  correspondent's  surprise  at  the  success  of  the  mills  is  ren- 
dered plainer  by  recalling  the  devastated  condition  of  parts  of  South 
Carolina  during  and  right  after  the  war.  Cf.  Andrews,  p.  34,  as  to 
Columbia  in  1865. 

67  No  particular  apprehension  can  be  ascribed  to  the  desire  of  a 
correspondent  of  a  newspaper  that,  lest  a  single  failure  should  occur 
in  the  development  of  mills  in  the  State,  all  possible  light  should  be 
thrown  upon  comparative  costs  of  steam  and  water  power  and  ad- 
vantages of  location  with  respect  to  freight,  health  and  labor  (News 
and  Courier,  Charleston,  April  29,  1881). 


299]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  1 93 

Where  unwillingness  to  accept  factory  employment  actually 
operated  to  keep  some  people  out  of  a  mill,  the  plant  was  in 
most  cases  located  in  a  city  and  could  depend  upon  the 
urban  population  for  its  help. 

But  there  might  be  difficulty  even  here.  The  President 
of  the  Atlanta  Cotton  Factory  in  1880  was  unable  to  get 
hands  to  run  the  mill  at  full  capacity.  He  thought  this  was 
due  to  objection  of  women  and  girls  to  the  class  of  work  or 
to  surroundings  in  the  mill.  A  newspaper  editorial,  com- 
menting on  the  situation,  thought  that  the  girls,  when  they 
considered  the  matter,  did  not  mind  factory  work,  but  that 
the  absence  of  cottages  for  operatives  was  the  cause  of  the 
dearth  of  labor,  rents  in  the  vicinity  of  the  mill  being  high, 
and  the  pay  being  too  small  to  allow  of  a  long  trip  from 
home  to  plant.  It  was  pointed  out  that  if  operatives  were 
brought  from  the  North,  as  was  being  contemplated,  the 
same  housing  problem  would  confront  them  as  the  natives. 
However,  if  suitable  cottages  were  built  near  the  mill,  the 
president  "  could  obtain  in  Atlanta  and  the  section  of  coun- 
try adjacent  any  number  of  women  and  girls  who  will  not 
only  gladly  work,  but  will  be  eternally  grateful  to  him  for 
furnishing  them  the  imeans  of  earning  a  comfortable  and 
honest  livelihood."68 

It  was  explained  that  the  managers  of  the  Charlotte  Cot- 
ton Mills,  employing  fifty -five  hands,  nearly  all  skilled 
workers  drawn  from  surrounding  factories,  "  had  been 
anxious  to  obtain  their  operatives  among  home  people,  but 
some  insuperable  prejudice  seems  to  exist  to  the  business, 
and  not  more  than  one  or  two,  so  far,  have  engaged."69 

Difficulty  in  getting  labor  was  not  more  hindering  in  any 

68  Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  Jan.  2,  1880.  In  Charleston,  which 
has  had  a  bad  reputation  on  the  score  of  availability  of  labor,  a  mill 
in  the  last  two  decades  has  solved  the  problem  by  building  an  excel- 
lent village  around  the  factory.  Most  of  the  operatives,  it  is  true, 
have  not  come  from  Charleston,  but  from  other  parts  of  South  Caro- 
lina and  from  other  States.  "We  have  always  had  enough  help;  we 
could  start  another  mill  right  in  our  village  and  have  labor  enough 
for  it"  (Julius  Koester,  int.,  Charleston,  S.  C,  Dec.  27,  1916). 

69  Raleigh  Observer,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb. 
26,  1 881. 

13 


194  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH         [3OO 

city  than  in  Charleston.  Labor  was  the  bete  noire  of  the 
Charleston  Manufacturing  Company.  And  after  the  event 
transpired,  it  seemed  that  every  one  should  have  recognized 
that  this  would  be  the  case.  That  a  plant  which  was  the 
perfect  embodiment  of  the  cotton  mill  campaign,  as  has 
been  seen,  should  be  built  in  Charleston,  was  natural ;  that 
it  could  not  succeed  was  almost  as  inevitable.  Founded  in 
idealism,  it  was  not  able  to  prosper  in  fact.  Born  in  the 
minds  and  hearts  of  Charleston's  best,  it  did  not  proceed 
from  the  determined  and  more  silent  cooperation  of  the 
whole  community  in  the  manner  of  other  ventures  which 
became  permanent.  It  must  be  remembered,  however,  that 
this  mill  stood  at  the  commencement  of  the  cotton  mill 
period  in  the  South ;  it  in  a  sense  marked  the  epoch.  There 
were  few  traditions,  either  local,  state  or  sectional,  upon 
which  to  calculate.  One  of  the  leading  projectors  of  the 
company,  explaining  that  at  the  time  the  mill  was  started 
there  were  few  females  in  cotton  factories,  described  the 
unfortunate  experience  of  this  first  enterprise  in  a  large 
seaport :  "  It  was  considered  belittling — oh !  very  bad !  It 
was  considered  that  for  a  girl  to  go  into  a  cotton  factory 
was  just  a  step  toward  the  most  vulgar  things.  They  used 
to  talk  about  the  girls  working  in  mills  up-country  as  if 
they  were  in  places  of  grossest  immorality.  It  was  said  to 
be  the  same  as  a  bawdy  house ;  to  let  a  girl  go  into  a  cotton 
factory  was  to  make  a  prostitute  of  her." 

"  How  was  it,"  he  was  asked,  "  that  this  was  not  under- 
stood by  you  gentlemen  in  launching  the  Charleston  Manu- 
facturing Company ;  that  the  women  of  the  laboring  class  in 
Charleston  would  not  go  into  the  mill  ?  " 

The  reply  was  undoubtedly  the  plain  fact.  "  It  never  oc- 
curred to  us,"  he  said.  "We  canvassed  the  matter  among 
ourselves."70 

"Our  idea  in  starting  the  Charleston  Manufacturing 
Company,"  said  another  of  the  original  stockholders,  "was 
that  there  were  many  people  here  who  wanted  work,  needed 

70  William  M.  Bird,  int.,  Charleston. 


30 1[]  THE   LABOR   FACTOR  1 95 

it.  We  found  out  they  did  not  want  it.  They  were  ashamed 
to  work  in  a  factory.  We  thought  it  was  going  to  help  the 
town  immensely.  We  found  just  the  reverse.  Instead  of 
people  flocking  here,  we  had  to  take  discarded  labor  from 
other  mills  and  bring  it  here.  We  thought  we  could  get 
enough  people  in  Charleston  to  fill  the  mill,  but  we  found 
the  number  here  willing  to  work  was  very  small. "7X 

Local  help  failing,  there  was  difficulty  in  obtaining  hands 
from  the  up-country.  "  Some  operatives  from  the  Pied- 
mont objected  to  coming  to  Charleston  in  the  summer  time. 
They  had  seen  many  Charlestonians  going  through  the  Pied- 
mont region  to  the  mountains  for,  they  said,  their  health. 
This  unfounded  prejudice  operated."72  "  Men  were  get- 
ting good  pay  in  fertilizer  works,  on  the  wharves  and  in 

71 W.  P.  Carrington,  int.,  Charleston.  Another  said :  "  Young 
women  looked  upon  factory  work  as  lowering,  and  thought  it  was 
dangerous  for  young  men  and  young  women  to  work  together  as 
they  must  do.  I  thought  this  myself  until  I  saw  them  working  in  fac- 
tories at  the  North;  every  girl  would  have  two  hundred  or  three 
hundred  jealous  girl  eyes  watching  her;  they  were  safer  than  in  their 
own  homes"  (it  is  useful  to  remember  that  country  people  going  to 
a  country  mill  village  found  themselves  surrounded  by  persons  all  in 
the  same  situation — there  was  nothing  but  the  industrial  commu- 
nity. In  a  city,  however,  even  if  the  factory  has  its  own  cottages, 
operatives  might  feel  censure  of  a  non-industrial  population.  Fur- 
thermore, among  city  dwellers,  however  poor,  women  and  girls  were 
less  accustomed  to  work  than  was  true  in  the  country,  and  would  be 
more  regardful  of  fancied  social  distinctions).  The  Charleston 
Manufacturing  Company  encountered  trouble  in  recruiting  labor  that 
an  older  and  smaller  venture  in  the  place  did  not,  partly  because  it 
had  been  so  much  discussed  and  stood  out  in  the  public  mind,  im- 
pressed with  a  declaratively  industrial  character.  "  The  Charleston 
Bagging  Manufacturing  Company,"  this  informant  continued,  "  mak- 
ing bagging  from  jute,  used  native  labor,  a  hundred  operatives  or 
so.  The  bagging  mill  had  been  successful  with  female  labor,  and 
this  encouraged  us  in  our  company."  But  the  event  as  it  transpired 
was  not  a  complete  surprise :  "  Still  we  understood  that  Charleston 
having  had  almost  no  factories,  there  would  be  prejudice  against 
females  working.  But  we  thought  this  would  wear  off.  We  did 
not  expect  to  get  our  labor  force  from  Charleston  at  first.  We 
thought  the  native  labor  would  sift  in  gradually,  and  this  proved  to 
be  true.  Lockwood  (the  New  England  engineer  who  designed  the 
mill)  told  truly  when  he  explained  that  the  first  expert  operatives 
to  come  to  a  new  place  were  floating,  and  that  it  would  require  two 
or  three  years  to  get  a  steady,  experienced  force.  In  our  impatience 
we  looked  upon  the  natural  slowness  in  getting  operatives,  particu- 
larly women,  as  a  terrible  delay"  (A.  B.  Murray,  int.,  Charleston). 

"  Ibid. 


I96  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH         [3  02 

industries/'  said  another,  "and  women  did  not  need  to 
work.  There  was  not  the  press  of  life  there  was  in  a  colder 
climate."73 

This  story  of  trials  seemed  to  he  coming1  to  a  bright  con- 
clusion :  "  We  brought  the  expert  labor  from  the  Piedmont, 
and  the  native  population  sifted  in  later,  and  took  hold  very 
nicely."  But  it  was  only  passing  into  its  final  phase :  "  The 
two  or  three  years  following  1880  were  bad  ones  for  cotton 
mills.  On  August  31,  1886,  the  end  of  the  company's  fiscal 
year,  the  mill  showed  a  small  net  profit.  On  the  night  of 
that  day,  the  earthquake  occurred.  The  railroads  gave  free 
transportation,  and  our  operatives  that  had  come  from  the 
up-country  left.  You  couldn't  have  held  them  here  with 
chains.  Even  the  local  operatives  went  away  with  the  up- 
country  operatives.  We  had  a  good  working  force  at  the 
time  of  the  earthquake — after  the  earthquake,  the  only 
thing  left  was  overhead  charges.  The  officers  were  here, 
but  the  operatives  had  all  disappeared."  The  prospects  of 
this  mill  were  never  really  promising  afterwards.74 

Until  very  recent  years,  any  class  consciousness  among 
Southern  cotton  mill  operatives  was  induced  by  the  prej- 
udice of  the  general  community  against  them.  The  mill 
village,  especially  the  company-owned  town,  has  crystal- 
lized this  sentiment,  and  politics  and  the  lack  of  any  other 
considerable  industry  in  the  South  have  made  their  unfor- 
tunate contributions.     Dislike  of  the  operatives'  station  is 

73  George  W.  Williams,  int.,  Charleston.  He  meant  this  to  apply 
to  the  Charleston  Manufacturing  Company  and  to  a  successor,  the 
Vesta  Mill.  "  We  were  great  phosphate  people  down  here,  and  the 
laborers  were  distracted.  But  the  leaders  stuck  to  it  [the  enter- 
prise of  a  big  mill  in  Charleston].  We  went  through  three  organi- 
zations"  (F.  Q.  O'Neill,  int.,  Charleston,  S.  C,  Dec.  27,  1916). 

74  A.  B.  Murray,  int.,  Charleston.  "  The  ground  was  in  a  tremor 
for  several  years  after  the  earthquake.  It  took  two  years  to  reor- 
ganize the  plant.  We  had  to  send  to  the  up-country  for  skilled 
operatives."  And  another  concluded :  "  We  thought  that  if  a  mill 
could  pay  in  the  up-country,  it  would  pay  to  build  a  mill  in  a  large 
center  like  Charleston.  The  labor  trouble  was  the  chief  reason  for 
the  failure."  He  felt  that  had  the  attempt  been  made  fifteen  years 
later,  after  10-cent  stores  and  dry  goods  stores  had  begun  to  employ 
women,  the  mill  might  have  succeeded  (William  M.  Bird,  int., 
Charleston). 


3O3]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  1 97 

undoubtedly  greater  at  present  than  in  the  years  when  the 
mills  were  building.  A  just  statement  of  the  facts  as  they 
prevailed  forty  years  ago  is  the  following :  "  There  was 
some  prejudice  against  operatives  on  the  part  of  others,  but 
it  did  not  show  itself.  So  far  as  speaking  to  them  cordially, 
etc.,  was  concerned,  they  were  received."75  It  has  been 
said  that  mill  managements  in  the  eighties  showed  none  of 
the  spirit  of  neglect  of  the  poor  whites  that  had  character- 
ized the  period  before  the  Civil  War,  and  this  attitude  was 
not  persuaded  merely  by  business  motives.  It  is  probable 
that  no  great  development  could  have  taken  place,  calling 
for  enlistment  of  the  service  of  thousands  in  the  population, 
without  some  objection  against  workers  in  the  new  industry 
becoming  evident.  But  in  the  case  of  the  cotton  mill  opera- 
tives this  was  at  a  minimum.  The  South  was  too  much  in 
earnest  in  its  work  to  question  the  social  status  of  those 
who  were  factors  in  its  accomplishment ;  work  was  too 
scarce  to  permit  of  a  choice  influenced  by  popular  dislike 
or  esteem;  the  South  of  the  eighties  was  twenty  years  re- 
moved in  time  and  many  more  years  removed  in  experience 
from  the  older  South  of  an  idle  class ;  and  last,  the  poor 
whites  by  entering  the  mills  tended  to  throw  off  the  atmos- 
phere of  unnoticed  destitution  in  which  they  had  been  en- 
veloped before  they  had  beeri  given  a  useful  outlet  for  their 
services.  If  their  situation  was  not  envied  by  some,  by  the 
majority  it  was  not  despised;  if  they  were  looked  upon  as  a 
class  with  disfavor,  this  was  not  on  the  surface,  and  nobody 
had  time  to  bother  with  such  notions.76 

A  part  of  the  prejudice  against  operatives,  if  it  may  be 

75  Charles  McDonald,  int.,  Charlotte.  "  Many  cf  those  who  be- 
came operatives  had  owned  their  own  land,  and  when  misfortune 
overtook  them,  in  the  shape  of  bad  crops  and  debt,  came  to  the 
cotton  mills"  (M.  L.  Bonham,  int.,  Anderson). 

76  The  usual  sentiment  is  illustrated  by  some  words  of  Hammett: 
"  It  is  clear  that  what  the  South  needs  more  than  anything  else  is 
diversified  labor,  and  to  realize  that  to  labor  is  respectable,  and  to  be 
idle  is  not  respectable.  With  all  the  unemployed  water  power  and 
other  natural  facilities  one  of  the  main  industries  should  be  to  con- 
vert into  goods  a  part  of  the  cotton  produced  by  the  soil"  (quoted 
in  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Feb.  1,  1881). 


I98  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE    SOUTH         [3O4 

called  such,  perhaps  took  rise  in  objection  to  mills  on  the 
part  of  rural  communities.  This  was  a  different  thing  from 
the  social  discrimination  spoken  of  above.  It  was  a  con- 
flict between  occupations,  not  between  elements  in  the  popu- 
lation. "  Right  at  first,"  said  one  informant,  "  there  was  a 
good  deal  of  opposition  to  the  mills  on  the  part  of  farmers, 
and  this  made  labor  hard  to  get."77  Another  asserted: 
"  Our  white  people  were  accustomed  to  be  their  own  mas- 
ters. They  had  not  lived  in  great  groups  or  worked  under 
bosses  and  that  kind  of  thing."  He  remembered  that  this 
hindered  the  recruiting  of  local  hands.78 

In  the  same  issue  of  a  South  Carolina  newspaper  saying 
that  "  Cedar  Creek  .  .  .  affords  ample  water  power  at  this 
point  [Society  Hill]  for  a  factory,"  and  that  "there  is 
plenty  of  labor,"  it  was  told  that  the  management  of  the 
Camperdown  Mills,  at  Greenville,  was  finding  it  impossible 
to  get  two  hundred  and  fifty  extra  hands  needed  to  run  the 
plant  at  night.  This  was  due,  it  was  explained,  to  the  pres- 
ence of  disorderly  women  in  the  neighborhood,  who  were 
proposed  to  be  used  as  operatives,  and  who  could  not  be  got 
rid  of.  Circulars  were  distributed  all  along  the  line  of  the 
Atlanta  and  Charlotte  Railroad,  and  in  other  directions. 
The  mill  offered  free  transportation  and  a  dollar  a  day  for 
all  time  lost  by  prospective  operatives,  but,  after  an  ex- 
penditure of  $500,  no  more  workers  were  in  the  factory, 
and  it  was  regretted  that  the  mills  were  "  receiving  a  large 
accumulation  of  orders  it  will  be  impossible  for  them  to 
fill."70 

The  scarcity  of  labor  which  was  experienced  twenty-five 
years  later  was  of  an  entirely  different  character  from  the 

77  Marshall  Orr,  int.,  Anderson,  S.  C,  Sept.  10,  1916. 

78  M.  L.  Bonham,  int.,  Anderson. 

79  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb.  23,  1881.  Without  men- 
tion of  the  reason  for  it,  this  fact  of  scarcity  of  help  for  the  Camper- 
down  Mills  was  recalled  to  Mrs.  Gridley,  who  confirmed  the  report 
of  years  before :  "  If  Camperdown  sought  in  vain  to  get  250  opera- 
tives in  the  early  eighties,  it  must  have  been  because  the  mill  had  a 
rough  class  of  help.  The  bad  reputation  the  labor  force  earned 
kept  away  the  mountain  people  the  mill  was  trying  to  attract"  (Mrs. 
M.  P.  Gridley,  int.,  Greenville). 


305]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  1 99 

scattered  instances  here  noted.  After  1900  it  became  a 
problem  of  inore  or  less  general  concern ;  many  mills  bad 
been  built,  some  of  them  very  large,  and  the  condition  of  the 
body  of  the  poor  whites1  was  somewhat  better  than  in  the 
earlier  period,  not  a  little  by  agency  of  the  cotton  manu- 
facturing industry  itself.  In  spite  of  a  degree  of  optimism, 
difficulty  was  presaged  in  an  address  before  the  Southern 
Cotton  Spinners  Association  in  1903 :  "  Now  in  regard  to 
an  insufficient  supply  of  native-born  help.  This  'may  !be 
true  in  localities,  but  it  has  been  the  experience  of  all  manu- 
facturing centres  that  the  building  of  the  mills  has  eventu- 
ally drawn,  in  close  proximity,  people  from  the  country  and 
outlying  districts,  and  it  is  not  worth  while  to  consider  this 
matter  as  fatal  to  the  future  increase  of  spindleage  here." 
The  speaker  thought  that  "  even  when  our  native  country 
help  is  exhausted  ...  if  it  be  true  that  cotton  manufac- 
turing may  decline  in  our  sister  countries,  there  will  be  op- 
portunities for  skilled  employes  from  those  countries  to  be 
obtained.  We  should  not  cross  this  bridge  until  we  come 
to  it."80 

It  has  been  said  that  the  projectors  of  cotton  mills  in  the 
South  not  only  welcomed  the  native  whites  as  workpeople, 

80  Proceedings  7th  Annual  Convention,  address  of  E.  W.  Thomas, 
p.  149  ff.  Tompkins  in  1900  had  foreseen  that  the  objection  to  night 
work  would  take  care  of  itself,  for  "as  mills  increase  labor  will 
become  scarcer  until  there  will  be  no  available  labor  for  night  work  " 
(Labor  Legislation,  p.  4).  In  1904  a  Georgian  speaking  to  Georgians 
said :  "  Why  one  section — a  comparatively  old  one — is  short  of  labor, 
is  not  my  province  to  discuss.  It  is  simply  a  question  and  no  theory 
that  we  have  confronting  us."  He  thought  that  immigration  agents 
ought  to  draw  workers  from  Italy,  in  about  the  same  geographical 
latitude  with  Georgia,  to  fill  the  domestic  "  vacuum  of  labor,"  and 
wanted  Georgia  represented  at  the  St.  Louis  World's  Fair  by  a 
solicitor  who  would  operate  in  conjunction  with  real  estate  firms 
and  the  railroads  in  bringing  home-seekers  to  the  State  (Georgia 
Industrial  Assn.,  proceed.  4th  Annual  Convention,  address  of  Hon. 
I.  C.  Wade,  p.  34  ff.).  The  convention  appointed  a  committee  "to 
urge  the  establishment  of  a  Department  of  Immigration  by  the 
State  of  Georgia"  (proceed.,  p.  33).  In  1907  Mr.  Kohn  wrote  that 
"  there  is  plenty  of  capital,  energy,  enthusiasm,  business  ability, 
water  power  and  cotton  for  South  Carolina  to  have  very  many  more 
spindles  than  she  now  has.  The  one  difficulty  is  that  of  securing 
additional  labor"  (Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  60).  Cf.  ibid.,  p.  63, 
and  T.  W.  Uttley,  p.  68. 


200  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [^306 

but  planned  factories  in  many  instances  partly  with  the 
express  purpose  of  affording  them  employment.  There 
were  some  cases,  however,  in  which  the  possibility  of  em- 
ploying the  poor  whites  was  curiously  overlooked,  and 
operatives  were  sought  or  proposed  to  be  sought  outside  of 
the  South.  It  cannot  be  said  for  this  strange  neglect  of  the 
obvious  opportunity  of  utilizing  the  Southern  population 
that  the  poor  whites  were  "out  of  sight,  out  of  mind." 
They  were  very  much  in  evidence  everywhere,  were  mutely 
appealing  for  assistance  and  notice;  even  asking,  if  one 
pleases,  to  be  exploited.  The  disposition  to  seek  opera- 
tives outside  of  the  South,  so  far  as  it  showed  itself,  was 
fostered  by  three  circumstances :  first,  the  feeling  that  ex- 
perienced workers  must  be  found  to  start  the  industry ; 
second,  the  desire  to  weaken  the  negro  by  increasing  the 
white  population ;  third,  new  and  prospective  cotton  manu- 
facturers fell  in  easily  with  the  prevalent  plans  of  agricul- 
tural interests  to  secure  immigration  to  the  section. 

How  earnestly  Senator  James,  of  Rhode  Island,  plead 
for  the  establishment  of  cotton  mills  by  Southern  planters, 
and  how  he  urged  that  the  needy  native  white  people  be  em- 
ployed in  the  factories,  has  been  noticed.  Eager,  however, 
to  leave  no  stone  unturned  in  proving  the  plausibility  of  his 
proposal  and  in  answering  especially  the  question  as  to  how 
help  was  to  be  gotten,  he  declared  that  "  Even  should  the 
planter,  who  goes  into  the  manufacture  of  cotton,  find  it 
necessary  to  import  his  operatives  from  Europe  at  his  own 
expense,  he  would  still  be  a  great  gainer  by  the  transac- 
tion." He  showed  how,  by  saving  one  cent  per  pound  on 
raw  cotton — the  cost  of  transporting  the  staple  to  a  North- 
ern mill — the  Southern  manufacturer  would  be  able  to  de- 
fray the  charges  of  bringing  over  English  operatives,  and 
have  a  considerable  surplus  to  his  credit.81  This  suggestion 
seems  to  have  been  tried  in  practice,  for  it  is  said  that  a 
superintendent  of  the  Augusta  Factory,  probably  in  the 
seventies,  brought  a  boatload  of  operatives  from  Scotland. 

81  Cf.  DeBow,  vol.  i,  p.  238  ff. 


307]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  201 

The  mills  of  Augusta  still  have  English  and  Scotch  people 
in  them,  likely  descendants  of  these  immigrants.82  Foreign- 
born  operatives  transplanted  to  Augusta  supplied  many  of 
the  mills  throughout  the  South,  particularly  in  the  Caro- 
linas,  with  skilled  superintendents  and  overseers. 

A  writer  at  the  close  of  the  Civil  War  would  have  been 
right  in  including  the  whole  South  in  an  observation  made 
as  to  Charleston,  that  it  wished  immigrants  from  Europe 
rather  than  newcomers  from  the  North.  "  Immigration  is 
held  to  be  the  panacea  for  all  present  evils  and  troubles. 
One  of  the  representatives  elect  from  this  city  will  make 
strong  efforts  to  secure  legislative  action  at  the  coming  ses- 
sion of  the  General  Assembly  in  favor  of  a  bill  granting 
State  aid  to  foreign  immigrants.  The  Yankee  is  not  wanted 
here,  except  by  the  enlightened  few ;  but  Germans  who  will 
consent  to  take  a  secondary  position  will  be  welcomed."83 

The  extraordinary  scheme  of  "  The  Region  of  the  Savan- 
nah Colonization  Association "  for  bringing  New  England 
operatives  to  cotton  mills  in  the  South  is  worth  mention  be- 
cause, with  its  preposterousness,  it  shows  the  thought  in  the 
minds  of  some.  It  was  set  forth  in  1882,  and  never  got 
beyond  the  stage  of  advocacy.  It  was  a  promoters'  plan 
for  combining  a  pastime  for  rich  men  of  leisure  with  a 
health  resort  and  an  industrial  community.  An  agency  of 
the  Association  explained  that  the  Region  of  the  Savannah 
(the  entire  States,  apparently,  of  Georgia  and  South  Caro- 
lina), offered  in  its  piney  woods  and  mild  and  dry  climate 
the  only  relief  from  pulmonary  diseases.  New  England 
cotton  mill  operatives  who,  left  in  Northern  factories,  were 
destined  to  lose  their  ability  to  work  or  would  even  die, 
might  come  to  this  salubrious  district  and  regain  their  health 
by  coupling  farm  work  with  factory  attendance.     In  New 

82  George  T.  Lynch,  int.,  Augusta,  Ga.,  Dec.  30,  1916.  Compare 
the  proposal  of  "  Hanover  "  that  English  operatives  be  brought  to 
Richmond  (Daily  Dispatch,  Jan.  14,  1880). 

83  " '  The  only  way  in  which  we  can  control  the  labor  of  the  free 
negro  is  to  bring  him  in  competition  with  the  white  laborer,'  is  the 
language  of  scores  of  men."  By  "  the  white  laborer "  the  native 
white  was  not  meant  (Andrews,  pp.  207-208). 


202  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [^08 

England  were  found,  besides  the  broken-down  mill  hands, 
retired  business  and  professional  men  of  means,  for  whom 
the  Northern  climate  from  December  to  May  was  too  severe 
for  comfort.  It  was  proposed  that  some  of  these  wealthy- 
invalids  should  buy  a  few  thousands  of  acres  in  the  Region 
of  the  Savannah,  build  forty  or  fifty  neat  but  inexpensive 
houses  on  the  tract,  and  rent  those  not  occupied  by  them- 
selves (they  would  be  there  to  give  character  to  the  project), 
to  sick  New  England  operatives,  and  to  pleasure-seekers 
wishing  a  wintering  place  in  the  South.  "  This  would  give 
a  nucleus  for  a  permanent  settlement,  and  in  a  very  short 
time  an  industrial  community  would  grow  up  about  it."  A 
correspondent  of  the  Savannah  Morning  News  was  quoted 
approvingly,  this  writer  proposing  that  each  family  might 
have  a  forty-acre  farm  and  divide  its  labor  between  agricul- 
ture and  a  cotton  mill  which  would  be  centrally  situated.  It 
was  asserted  by  the  projectors  of  this  scheme  that  it  would 
make  a  return  of  100  per  cent  on  the  capital  invested.84 

84  Gannon,  p.  8  ff.  "  The  Region  of  the  Savannah  Colonization 
Association  "  was  built  on  the  constitution  of  the  defunct  American 
Colonizing  Company,  founded  in  1818,  for  the  furtherance  of  trade, 
it  was  declared,  between  the  South  Atlantic  States  and  the  West 
Indies,  the  west  coast  of  Africa  and  the  Brazils,  the  principal  Amer- 
ican depot  being  at  Charleston,  Port  Royal  or  Savannah ;  the  build- 
ing of  small  cotton  mills,  to  be  operated  by  a  transplanted  New  Eng- 
land industrial  population,  would  be  linked  with  the  construction  of 
small  ships  to  carry  the  product  of  these  factories.  Another  inspi- 
ration to  the  project  was  President  Grevy's  system  of  cooperation; 
the  success  of  the  young  Meaux  workman  who  in  one  year  built 
250  houses  on  a  tract  of  land  of  an  old  marquis  and  started  his 
colony  at  a  cost  of  240,000  francs  with  considerable  profit  to  his 
fellow-enterprisers — he  began  with  only  ten  5-franc  pieces  of  his 
own — was  instanced.  The  aims  of  the  Savannah  Association  were 
to  be  accomplished  largely  through  dissemination  of  information. 
The  pamphlet  was  published  as  propaganda  by  Gannon  and  Mayhew, 
176  Tremont  Street,  Boston,  who  were  general  agents  for  the  organi- 
zation. The  Southern  Land,  Emigration  and  Improvement  Com- 
pany, a  New  York  organization  designed  to  encourage  immigration 
to  the  South,  said  in  its  prospectus :  "  That  the  South  now  offers 
greater  inducements  to  capital,  enterprise  and  intelligent  industry 
than  any  other  quarter  of  the  globe,  is  beyond  question  to  those  who 
are  informed  upon  the  subject.  .  .  .  The  Southern  people  them- 
selves are  thoroughly  awakened  at  last  to  the  fact  of  the  abundance 
of  their  resources.  They  are  putting  forth  every  energy  to  secure 
their   share   of   the   overflowing  tides   of   population   from   the   old 


3O9]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  203 

A  journal  which  championed  the  South's  interests,  la- 
menting the  failure  of  immigrants  to  go  to  that  section,  de- 
clared that  "  if  the  South  is  to  be  built  up,  her  unoccupied 
lands  turned  to  the  uses  of  civilization,  her  streams  become 
the  seats  of  great  'manufacturing  enterprises,  and  all  her 
natural  advantages  made  to  bear  material  development, 
there  must  be  a  systematic  effort  to  induce  immigration. 
Railroads,  States,  private  individuals,  are  all  alike  inter- 
ested in  this;  and  it  behooves  all  to  work  persistently  to 
accomplish  it."85 

It  seems  likely  that  immigrants,  especially  where  for- 
eigners, were  not  often  sought  by  the  South  for  industrial 
workers.  Agricultural  interests  were  uppermost  in  the 
minds  of  the  people,  and  schemes  to  supplant  the  free  negro 
were,  for  the  time  being,  as  natural  as  they  were  imprac- 
ticable.86 

Even  where  immigrants  had  been  in  mechanical  pursuits 
in  their  own  countries,  their  usefulness  in  industry  might 
be  overlooked.87 

world  .  .  ."  (quoted  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manu- 
facturers' Record,  Aug.  5,  1882).  The  alliance  of  the  South  Caro- 
lina Railroad  with  the  Georgia  Railroad  and  the  Central  Railway 
was  looked  upon  as  bringing  to  Charleston  "  increased  business, 
direct  trade  with  Europe  and  white  immigration"  (News  and 
Courier,  Charleston,  April  14,  1881). 

85  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
June  24,  1882. 

86  An  editorial  on  the  benefits  of  immigration  to  South  Carolina 
placed  the  whole  stress  upon  agriculture.  Nothing  was  said  about 
using  immigrants  in  cotton  mills,  though  Charleston's  advantage  in 
being  able  to  get  them  from  German  ports  at  two-thirds  of  the 
charge  if  taken  to  New  York,  was  mentioned  (News  and  Courier, 
Charleston,  May  20,  1881).  A  week  later  the  same  paper  com- 
mended the  commissioner  of  immigration  for  steering  foreigners 
away  from  "towns  or  cities  where  they  would  be  a  burden  to  them- 
selves and  those  around  them"  (June  17,  1881).  A  like  omission 
of  cotton  manufacturing  in  stating  the  reasons  for  immigration  is 
seen  in  an  address  of  the  Georgia  Commissioner  of  Land  and  Immi- 
gration to  the  State  legislature  (quoted  in  ibid.,  Aug.  5,  1881).  Cf. 
editorial  in  Observer,  Raleigh,  April  10,  1881. 

87  Sixteen  families — Poles,  Germans  and  Austrians — in  1881  passed 
through  Charleston  on  their  way  to  Columbia.  "  They  have  no 
property,  and  are  uncertain  of  their  final  destination.  They  are 
generally  mechanics,  but  claim  to  know  something  about  farming, 
and  are  willing  to  do  anything  to  make  a  good  and  honest  living." 


204  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [3  10 

In  conclusion  of  these  references  to  advocacy  of  immi- 
gration as  apart  from  the  needs  of  cotton  mills,  it  is  inter- 
esting to  notice  a  jeu  d'esprit  of  "  Henry  LeBiank,"  written 
under  date  of  July  13,  1893,  twelve  years  in  the  future, 
predicting  failure  of  plans  for  European  immigration  to 
South  Carolina,  the  foreigners  being  unsuited  to  the  climate, 
crops  and  mode  of  living,  and  adding  in  a  postscript :  "  It 
would  do  you  good  to  see  the  immense  number  of  factories 
at  Columbia,  down  by  what  was  an  old  ditch,  but  now  a 
splendid  canal.  Spartanburg  has  over  30,000  population, 
and  seven  railroads  centre  there."88 

Instances  in  which  immigrants  were  looked  for  as  cot- 
ton mill  operatives  show  the  newness  of  the  South  to  indus- 
trialism, the  suddenness  with  which  an  urgent  program 
was  embraced.  How  foreign  manufacturing  was  to  the 
South's  past,  how  novel  a  departure  it  represented  in  the 
minds  of  mill  projectors,  comes  out  in  the  rare  cases  in 
which  native  whites  were  not  considered  as  operatives ;  such 
an  opportunity  might  not  even  be  debated,  but  it  was 
thought  that  new  wine  was  to  be  put  into  new  wineskins. 
Thus  in  advocating  the  building  of  a  mill  near  Winnsboro, 
South  Carolina,  in  a  county  in  which  poor  whites  were 
plentiful,  these  were  overlooked  as  industrial  workers  and, 
for  that  matter,  as  agricultural  laborers.  "If  we  can  do  no 
better  let  us  spin  a  hundred  bales  at  first.  .  .  .  We  believe 

There  was  no  mention  of  directing  them  toward  cotton  mills  (News 
and  Courier,  Charleston,  May  10,  1881).  Relatively  few  immigrants 
actually  came — seventy-four  persons  colonized  in  South  Carolina  in 
a  typical  week — and  most  of  them  were  placed  with  farmers  (see 
ibid.,  March  23  and  July  1,  1881).  Despite  every  demonstration  of 
failure,  projects  for  bringing  in  foreigners  to  become  cotton  farmers 
would  not  die.  As  late  as  1908  Tompkins  declared :  "  Every  condi- 
tion in  the  cotton  growing  States  is  favorable  for  the  European 
farmer  who  wants  to  emigrate.  .  .  .  Such  a  movement  would  go 
further  than  any  other  to  insure  a  cotton  supply  adequate  to  the 
world's  demand  and  at  a  reasonable  price"  (Cotton  Growing,  p.  7). 
And  earlier  he  had  urged  that  "  the  New  England  Cotton  Manufac- 
turers' Association  turn  itself  into  an  emigration  society  pro  tern, 
for  the  purpose  of  securing  the  occupation  of  the  Southern  cotton 
land"  (The  Storing  and  Marketing  of  Cotton,  reprint  from  Trans- 
actions of  New  England  Cotton  Manufacturers'  Assn.,  vol.  77,  p. 
i9  ff.). 
88  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  June  15,  1881. 


3  1 1]  THE   LABOR   FACTOR  205 

there  is  money  enough  in  the  county,  here  and  there,  to 
make  at  least  a  modest  beginning,  so  as  to  attract  outside 
capital.  Shall  the  effort  be  made,  or  shall  other  counties, 
once  far  behind  us  in  wealth,  take  the  lead  and  rapidly  out- 
strip us?  We  want  white  immigrants.  Bring  the  mills  here 
and  they  will  come.  Colored  labor  will  raise  the  cotton,  and 
white  immigrants  will  convert  it  into  yarn."89  A  news- 
paper in  another  community  concluded  that  the  freed  ne- 
groes had  done  little  to  better  their  condition  and  had,  more- 
over, kept  away  skilled  immigrants ;  " .  .  .  remove  at  least 
half  the  negro  labor  from  the  State,  then  it  [skilled  immi- 
grant labor]  will  come,  and  with  it  capital  which  will  seek 
investment  in  our  manufacturing  interests,  and  at  once  put 
us  on  the  highway  to  wealth,  power  and  happiness."90 

Another  editor,  in  contrast  to  these  less  thoughtful  con- 
temporaries, expressed  sanely  the  better  judgment  in  op- 
posing wholesale  immigration  on  the  ground  that  there 
were  needy  people  in  the  South  to  be  thought  for  first,  and 
because  the  section  was  in  no  position  to  invite  new-comers 
to  share  in  her  uncertain  lot :  "  We  have  many  worthy 
native  people  of  the  more  indigent  classes  who  must  be  pro- 
vided for  in  some  way  before  we  talk  of  hurrying  those 
here  who,  at  the  best,  may  take  the  bread  out  of  the  mouths 
of  our  own  people.  We  are  by  no  means  opposed  to  legiti- 
mate immigration,  but  we  are  very  far  indeed  from  seeing 
the  good  sense  of  bringing  upon  ourselves  or  our  unhappy 
visitors  the  cruel  lot  of  being  thrown  into  Southern  com- 

89  Winnsboro  News,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston, 
Feb.  8,  1881, 

90  Pickens  Sentinel,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb. 
3,  1881.  An  opportunity  of  securing  skilled  textile  operatives  among 
immigrants  from  Alsace-Lorraine  was  evidently  received  gladly.  J. 
H.  Diss  DeBar,  of  New  York,  directing  a  movement  to  bring  over 
foreigners,  had  written  to  the  president  of  the  Atlanta  Factory,  for 
facts  as  to  the  employment  of  any  immigrants  that  might  be  sent 
down.  Other  Georgia  mills  were  urged  to  communicate  with  this 
agent  with  information  as  to  wages,  rent  and  other  conditions  affect- 
ing work  in  the  manufactories  (Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  March 
24,  1880). 


206  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE    SOUTH         [312 

munities  without  bread  and  without  any  hope  of  employ- 
ment."91 

The  futility  of  attempts  to  attract  immigrants  began  to  be 
seen  in  South  Carolina  early  in  the  eighties,  a  newspaper 
declaring  "We  hope  the  State  will  abolish  the  office  of 
superintendent  of  immigration.  It  is  ...  a  worse  than 
useless    expense."92      Twenty-five    years    later,    following 

91  Columbia  Register,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston, 
Feb.  3,  1881.  One  long  acquainted  with  the  State's  politics  believed 
the  motive  of  supplying  cotton  mill  operatives  was  not  important, 
that  "back  of  the  efforts  of  South  Carolina,  through  Commissioner 
Boykin's  office,  to  secure  immigration,  was  the  desire  to  get  rid  of 
the  negro  and  to  bring  in  whites  to  take  his  place."  When  Boykin 
left  office,  another  commissioner  was  appointed.  "  Then  there  were 
some  years  when  there  was  no  commissioner  of  agriculture  or  immi- 
gration. It  was  largely  a  matter  of  politics"  (M.  L.  Bonham,  int., 
Anderson).  As  to  the  purpose  to  oust  the  negro,  the  comment  of  a 
German-language  newspaper  is  indicative,  especially  since  Germans 
were  particularly  sought:  "Col.  Boykin,  the  immigration  commis- 
sioner, has  returned  from  New  York,  and  reports  that  he  is  able  to 
get  in  Castle  Garden  as  many  immigrants  for  South  Carolina  as  are 
wanted.  He  seems  to  be  intent  chiefly  upon  getting  laborers  who 
are  able  to  take  the  place  of  the  negroes"  (Deutsche  Zeitung, 
Charleston,  April  25,  1881).  Cf.  Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  Jan. 
31,  1880.  With  the  negro  question  in  mind,  Henry  W.  Grady  said: 
"  Companies  of  immigrants  sent  down  from  the  sturdy  settlers  at 
the  North  will  solve  the  Southern  problem  .  .  ."  (Dyer,  in  New 
South,  p.  139).  Cf.  State  of  S.  C,  Fourth  Annual  Report  of  Com- 
missioner of  Agriculture,  Commerce  and  Immigration,  p.  4,  and  pre- 
ceding reports ;  DeBow,  vol.  ii,  p.  127.  Frequently  immigration  to 
the  South  from  other  parts  of  this  country  was  in  mind ;  cf.  DeBow, 
ibid.,  and  quotation  from  United  States  Economist,  in  Baltimore 
Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Sept.  30,  1882. 

92  Abbeville  Press  and  Banner,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier, 
Charleston,  Nov.  25,  1881.  _  Cf.  State  of  S.  C,  ibid.,  p.  32.  A  pam- 
phlet issued  by  the  immigration  commissioner  was  attacked  as 
sophomoric,  unfair  in  claiming  too  much,  and  generally  "  a  disgrace 
to  the  State"  (News  and  Courier,  ibid.).  In  1894  the  editor  of  a 
publication  that  had  done  much  to  encourage  immigration  admitted 
that  the  South  had  been  "  in  no  condition  to  invite  immigration.  .  .  . 
All  efforts  to  attract  settlers  to  this  section  could  only  prove  futile. 
The  time  was  not  ripe"  (Edmonds,  p.  29 ff.).  The  most  famous 
effort  to  recruit  foreign  immigrants  as  operatives  for  Southern  mills 
was  the  episode  of  the  Wittekind,  which,  even  without  hindrance 
from  the  federal  authorities,  was  so  unsuccessful  that  it  would 
hardly  have  been  followed  up.  South  Carolina  planters  were  inter- 
ested in  securing  farm  hands  by  the  venture,  and  combined  with 
manufacturers  in  a  fund  which  was  utilized  through  the  State  immi- 
gration commissioner.  The  North  German  Lloyd  steamer  Wittekind, 
in  two  trips  to  Charleston,  in  November,  1906,  and  February,  1907, 
brought  a  few  hundred  passengers,  principally  Belgians,  Austrians 


313]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  207 

South  Carolina's  unsuccessful  effort  at  importing  immi- 
grants, the  Georgia  Farmers'  Union  "  unanimously  voted 
against  foreign  immigration,  because  it  would  bring  unde- 
sirable people  who  would  compete  with  the  Georgians  for 
factory  labor  and  would  raise  so  much  cotton  that  it  would 
lower  the  price."93  This  is  a  far  cry  from  the  disposition 
remarked  in  a  few  of  the  early  mill  projectors  to  overlook 
the  opportunity,  not  to  mention  duty,  to  employ  the  native 
whites  in  the  textile  industry. 

The  Southern  mills  have  almost  no  foreigners.  Just  oc- 
casionally a  few  trickle  in  by  chance.  "  Once  in  a  while," 
said  a  superintendent,  "we  have  a  spasm  of  French  Cana- 
dians and  Poles.  They  are  not  imported,  nobody  goes 
after  them.  They  don't  stay  very  long,  and  come  only  two 
or  three  families  together."94 

and  Galicians.  It  is  likely  that  disappointment  of  disingenuous 
prospective  employers  at  frustration  of  their  plans  by  the  central 
government  has  colored  judgment  of  the  results  of  the  experiment, 
but  it  appears  all  in  all  that  the  new-comers  were  not  so  well  con- 
tent as  to  form  a  satisfied  nucleus  which  would  automatically  attract 
relatives  in  succeeding  years.  Mr.  Gadsden,  a  representative  of 
South  Carolina  business  men,  who  investigated  the  matter  in  Eu- 
rope, wisely  reported :  "  Our  efforts  have  been  almost  entirely  ex- 
pended in  inducing  immigrants  to  come  to  the  South,  and  we  have 
thought  little  or  nothing  of  how  the  immigrant  is  to  be  treated  after 
the  immigrant  has  come  in  our  midst;  ...  we  have  entirely  over- 
looked our  industrial  conditions,  namely,  that  the  wage  scale  through- 
out the  South  is  based  on  negro  labor  .  .  .  our  attitude  throughout 
the  South  toward  the  white  labor  will  have  to  be  materially  altered 
before  we  can  expect  to  have  the  immigrant  satisfied  to  remain  as 
a  laborer  with  us"  (quoted  in  Hart,  pp.  52-53).  On  the  whole 
matter  see  State  of  S.  C.,  ibid. ;  a  good  deal  of  reading  between  the 
lines  is  necessary.  Cf.  also  Goldsmith,  p.  10,  and  Kohn,  Cotton 
Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  24.  The  action  of  South  Carolina  was  preceded 
by  agitation  in  manufacturers'  associations  in  other  Southern  States 
looking  toward  immigration.  A  speaker  before  the  Georgia  Indus- 
trial Association  in  1901  asserted :  "  There  is  room  in  Georgia  for 
several  hundred  thousand  competent  white  foreigners."  Three 
years  later  it  was  being  urged  that  practical  steps  be  taken  (Proceed. 
Fourth  Annual  Convention,  p.  13  ff.). 

93  Hart,  p.  54.  A  "  Southern  writer  "  was  quoted  as  saying  that 
"  The  temptation  of  cheap  alien  labor  from  abroad  is  obvious  as  one 
of  the  ways  in  which  a  home  population  may  be  dispossessed.  When 
it  ceases  to  fill  the  rank  and  file  with  its  own  sons  ...  it  ceases  to 
be  master  ...  of  the  country"  (ibid.,  p.  55). 

94  George  T.  Lynch,  int.,  Augusta.  Cf.  Thompson,  p.  30,  and 
Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  24. 


208  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH         [314 

It  has  been  seen  that  despite  shortage  of  operatives  in 
peculiar  individual  instances  and  ill-advised  efforts  to  at- 
tract immigrants  to  compensate  for  an  actual  or  anticipated 
scarcity  of  immediately  available  labor,  the  rule  at  the  open- 
ing of  the  cotton  mill  era  was  an  abundance  of  local  help. 
The  mere  erection  of  a  factory  was  sufficient  inducement 
to  the  gathering  of  a  working  force.  The  problem  was 
rather  to  secure  the  plant  than  the  operatives.  This  condi- 
tion lasted  for  about  twenty  years.  "  Labor  for  the  early 
factories  came  from  the  localities — 90  per  cent  of  it.  But 
after  1900,  when  there  was  a  madness  of  mill  building,  they 
began  to  pull  labor  from  a  distance  of  250  miles.  Whereas 
people  had  before  straggled  in  at  will,  the  mills  now  com- 
menced concentrated  efforts  to  get  them  out  of  the  moun- 
tains."95 In  the  active  years  preceding  the  panic  of  1907 
this  practice  became  more  frequent.  A  superintendent  in 
the  up-country  gave  his  experience:  "The  first  labor  for 
the  Spartan  Mills  came  from  the  surrounding  country,  and 
was  supplemented  soon  by  people  from  the  mountains  of 
North  Carolina  and  Tennessee.  In  1905-6  and  1906-7 
there  was  a  scarcity  of  labor.  Spartanburg  mills  sent 
agents  into  the  mountains  to  bring  out  help,  the  mill  ad- 
vancing railway  fares  of  operatives.  In  this  way  from 
1905  to  1907,  171  families  were  brought  to  this  mill."08 
The  advantage  of  the  cotton  mill  village  as  contrasted  with 
the  mountain  farm,  which  had  earlier  been  too  patent  to  re- 
quire statement,  began  to  be  carefully  explained  in  dodgers 
distributed  through  highland  districts,   or  were  set   forth 

95  H.  R.  Buist,  int.,  Charleston. 

96  W.  J.  Britton,  int.,  Spartanburg.  He  was  much  disappointed  in 
the  results  of  the  soliciting  system,  and  said  that  of  the  171  families 
brought  to  the  mill  village,  only  10  remained.  "  I  would  rather 
have  half  a  dozen  families  that  paid  their  own  way  to  the  mill  than 
fifty  families  brought  here."  Commenting  on  the  necessity  of  scout- 
ing for  labor,  Mr.  Copeland  declares  "  The  growth  of  the  industry 
has  taken  away  the  advantage  which  was  its  chief  asset."  In  the 
period  referred  to  employers  bid  against  each  other  for  help,  so  that 
wages  were  raised  nearly  one-fourth.  Almost  all  the  mills  were 
reported  to  be  short  of  their  full  complement  of  operatives ;  "  for 
the  time  being  the  South  had  built  more  mills  than  it  had  labor  to 
operate"  (p.  46  ff . ) . 


X 


315]  THE   LABOR   FACTOR  20O, 

by  satisfied  operatives  taken  along  by  agents  as  bait.97  Ex- 
haustion of  the  readily  available  supply  of  poor  whites  is 
further  indicated  in  efforts  since  the  Great  War  to  attract 
workers  from  the  eastern  sections,  which  lowland  tenants, 
in  their  full  knowledge  of  the  needs  and  opportunities  of 
the  mills,  had  already  been  constructively  solicited,  and  in 
the  building  of  mills  actually  in  the  mountain  districts.88 

It  has  been  seen  how  slavery  was  largely  responsible  for 
crushing  the  early  manufactures  which  arose  in  the  South 
and  prevented  recovery  of  industries  in  the  section.  At 
first  blush  it  seems  strange  that  negroes,  in  the  period 
before  the  Civil  War  in  which  manufactures  were  at  lowest 
ebb,  should  have  been  employed  in  cotton  mills.  It  might 
be  objected  that  slavery,  so  far  from  being  an  enemy  to  the 
textile  industry,  assisted  such  factories  as  were  in  operation. 

The  point,  however,  is  easily  cleared  up  when  it  is  re- 
membered that  the  old  mills  were  generally  very  small,  scat- 
tered, unstandardized,  and  made  the  rudest  products,  and 
when  it  is  considered  that  managers  of  factories,  many  of 
them  planters,  might  naturally  use  slaves  whom  they  owned 
or  could  hire  cheaply  rather  than  whites  who  were  less  de- 
pendent and  who  must  be  better  paid  and  differently  treated. 
There  was  less  difficulty  in  adapting  slaves  to  the  work  of 
the  ante-bellum  cotton  mills  than  in  employing  free  negroes 
in  later  years,  because  processes  were  more  elementary  and 
because  many  slaves,  especially  women  and  girls,  had  been 
taught  something  of  the  textile  art  in  domestic  industry  on 
the  plantations.  Thus  the  finding  of  negroes  in  mills  which 
anticipated  the  real  development  of  cotton  manufactures  in 
the  South  is  to  be  considered  rather  a  proof  of  the  depress- 
ing effect  of  slavery  upon  the  industry  than  as  supporting  a 
contrary  argument. 

It  may  be  believed  that  most  of  those  who  before  the  War 
advocated  the  use  of  negroes  in  cotton  mills  held  no  very- 
hopeful  or  plausible  economic  philosophy.     If  they  really 

97  Cf .  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  23,  and  John  C.  Campbell, 
From  Mountain  Cabin  to  Cotton  Mill,  especially  p.  5. 

98  S.  N.  Boyce  and  J.  Lee  Robinson,  int.,  Gastonia. 
14 


210  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [316 

understood  the  situation,  the  proposal  to  employ  slaves 
must  have  been  acknowledged  as  a  makeshift;  if  they  did 
not,  it  was  none  the  less  a  fanciful  dream.  In  most  cases 
there  must  have  been  no  further  thought  behind  the  use  of 
negroes  than  that  it  was  convenient,  cheap  and  sufficient  for 
the  limited  project  in  hand. 

Certainly  William  Gregg  made  a  sound  diagnosis  of  the 
South's  ailments,  and  showed  more  foresight  in  economic 
matters,  it  may  be  thought,  than  any  other  Southerner  of 
his  day.  Some  surprise,  therefore,  may  attach  to  the  state- 
ment that  he  advocated  the  operation  of  cotton  mills  with 
negro  labor.  The  explanation  lies  in  two  facts :  first,  though 
he  had  visited  the  Pennsylvania  and  New  England  fac- 
tories, there  was  nothing  in  the  South  to1  compare  with 
them,  and  it  would  have  taken  an  imagination  and  faith 
superior  even  to  his  to  transcend  the  numbing  effect  of  his 
dominantly  agricultural  surroundings  and  reach  beyond 
them  to  visualize  the  necessary  conditions  of  industry  as 
afterwards  proved  in  history ;  and  second,  seeing  the  great 
difficulties  in  the  way  of  his  proposals,  statesmanship 
prompted  him  to  utilize  any  means  that  offered  to  make  a 
beginning. 

There  is  something  pathetic  in  the  tone  of  his  appeal, 
born  almost  of  exasperation : 

Surely  there  is  nothing  in  cotton  spinning  that  can  poison  the 
atmosphere  of  South-Carolina.  Why  not  spin  as  well  as  plant  cot- 
ton? The  same  hand  that  attends  a  gin  may  work  a  carding  ma- 
chine. The  girl  who  is  capable  of  making  thread,  on  a  country 
spinning  wheel,  may  do  the  same  with  equal  facility,  on  the  throstle 
frame.  The  woman  who  can  warp  the  thread  and  weave  it,  on  a 
common  loom,  may  soon  be  taught  to  do  the  same,  on  a  power  loom; 
and  so  with  all  the  departments,  from  the  raw  cotton  to  the  cloth, 
experience  has  proved  that  any  child,  white  or  black,  of  ordinary 
capacity,  may  be  taught,  in  a  few  weeks,  to  be  expert  in  any  part 
of  a  cotton  factory;  moreover,  all  overseers  who  have  experience  in 
the  matter,  give  a  decided  preference  to  blacks  as  operatives." 

99  Domestic  Industry,  p.  21.  He  had  not  only  the  sight  of  South- 
ern mills  of  his  time  operating  with  negroes,  but  he  relied  upon  the 
judgment  of  a  well-known  authority  who  understood  the  English 
and  the  American  industry,  quoting  James  Montgomery  to  the  effect 
that  "  If  the  experiment  of  slave  labor  succeed  in  factories  as  is 
confidently  expected,  the  cost  of  manufacturing  the  cotton  into  cloth 


317]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  211 

The  Saluda  Factory,  near  Columbia,  was  reported  in  the 
early  fifties  to  be  operating  successfully  with  slave  labor, 
the  negroes  being  mostly  owned  by  the  company.  The  en- 
terprise was  of  $100,000  capital,  and  employed  128  opera- 
tives, including  children ;  there  were  5000  spindles  and  120 
looms,  the  product  being  heavy  brown  shirting  and  South- 
ern stripe.  "  The  superintendent  is  decidedly  of  the  opin- 
ion that  slave  labor  is  cheaper  for  cotton  manufacture  than 
free  white  labor.  The  average  cost  per  annum  of  those 
employed  in  this  mill,  he  says,  does  not  exceed  $75.  Slaves 
not  sufficiently  strong  to  work  in  the  cotton  fields  can  attend 
to  the  looms  and  spindles  in  the  cotton  mills.  .  .  .'"  The 
average  cost  of  a  white  operative  per  year  was  said  to  be 
$116,  so  that  those  using  slaves,  it  was  claimed,  enjoyed 
"  over  thirty  per  cent  saved  in  the  cost  of  labor  alone."100 

will  be  much  less  there  [in  the  South]  than  anywhere  else,  so  that  it 
will  not  be  surprising  if  in  the  course  of  a  few  years,  those  Southern 
factories  should  manufacture  coarse  cotton  goods,  and  sell  them  in 
the  public  markets,  at  one-half  the  price,  at  which  they  are  manu- 
factured in  England.  There  are  several  cotton  factories  in  Ten- 
nessee operated  entirely  by  slave  labor,  there  not  being  a  white  man 
in  the  mill  but  the  superintendent  .  .  ."  (ibid.).  Montgomery  in- 
stanced other  cases  of  actual  or  intended  use  of  negro  labor  at  Rich- 
mond and  Petersburg,  and  went  so  far  as  to  say  "  there  is  every 
reason  to  believe  that  it  is  better  adapted  to  the  manufactory  than 
to  the  field,  and  that  the  negro  character  is  susceptible  of  a  high 
degree  of  manufacturing  cultivation.  .  .  .  This  kind  of  labor  will  be 
much  cheaper,  and  far  more  certain  and  controllable.  The  manu- 
facturer will  have  nothing  to  do  with  strikes,  or  other  interruptions 
that  frequently  produce  serious  delay  and  loss  to  the  employer  "  (A 
Practical  Detail  of  the  Cotton  Manufacture  of  the  United  States  of 
America  (1840),  p.  192).  He  estimated  the  total  expense  for  the 
services  of  the  best  negro  workmen  for  a  whole  year  at  $170,  females 
and  young  men  being  cheaper.  Gregg's  quotation  from  Montgomery 
is  not  quite  accurate,  though  perfectly  exact  in  spirit.  Further  ex- 
tenuation is  brought  to  Gregg  in  the  statement  of  Mr.  Kohn  that 
"  The  history  of  the  early  efforts  of  the  industry  in  this  State  indi- 
cate that  slave  labor  was  very  largely  used"  (Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C, 
p.  24).  Buckingham,  writing  three  years  before  Gregg,  implied  that 
it  would  be  the  natural  thing  to  use  negroes  at  least  equally  with 
whites  (Slave  States  of  America,  vol.  i,  p.  171).  The  Rocky  Mount 
Mill,  in  North  Carolina,  employed  negroes  from  1820  to  1851  on  the 
coarser  yarns,  most  of  the  product  going  to  country  merchants  near 
the  factory,  but  some  to  the  Philadelphia  market.  In  1849  negroes 
were  the  only  operatives  (Thompson,  pp.  250-251). 

100  The  health  of  the  blacks  in  the  mill  was  said  to  be  better  than 
that  of  whites  in  the  same  occupations    (quoted  from  New  York 


212  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH         [3  1 8 

DeBow  approved  the  recommendation  of  a  Tennesseean 
that  slave  labor  be  applied  to  the  manufacture  of  cotton 
and  wool  throughout  the  South,  "  such  labor  having  been 
found  most  advantageous  wherever  adopted."101  It  may- 
Herald,  in  DeBow,  vol.  ii,  p.  127,  note).  Another  observer  said  that 
the  experienced  white  overseers  from  the  North,  at  first  prejudiced 
against  the  slave  labor,  testified  to  its  equal  efficiency  and  even  supe- 
riority in  many  respects  as  compared  with  white.  The  negroes  were 
tested  out  at  spinning,  but  later  learned  to  weave,  and  turned  out 
full  quantity  of  cloth.  "  The  resources  of  the  South  are  great,  and 
it  should  be  gratifying  to  all  who  view  these  facts,  with  the  eye  of 
a  statesman  and  philanthropist,  that  the  sources  of  profitable  em- 
ployment and  support  to  our  rapidly-increasing  African  labor  are 
illimitable,  and  must  remove  all  motives  for  emigration  to  other 
countries"  (ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  232).  In  1847  the  plant  was  declared  to 
have  done  a  "fine  business"  for  three  years  previous  (Columbia 
Telegraph,  quoted  in  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  18).  Other 
reports  of  this  mill  do  not  paint  so  bright  a  picture.  The  son  of  a 
man  who  relinquished  the  superintendency  in  1838  said  the  mill  was 
owned  by  slaveholders  who  chose  to  use  some  of  their  negroes  in 
this  way — they  were  planters  first  and  manufacturers  second.  The 
negro  labor  was  not  successful  (Charles  McDonald,  int.,  Charlotte). 
One  manager  of  the  mill  was  reported  as  saying  that  slave  labor 
failed  there  because  of  the  malarial  condition  of  the  neighborhood 
and  because  the  negroes'  fingers  were  clumsy  (William  Banks,  int., 
Columbia).  Mr.  Kohn  states  that  the  factory  was  operated  largely 
by  slave  labor  until  the  close  of  the  Civil  War,  when  whites  were 
installed,  and  quotes  Hammond's  Handbook  to  the  effect  that  90 
slaves  in  charge  of  a  white  overseer  were  "  capable  of  learning 
within  reasonable  limits"  (Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  16).  This  fac- 
tory, perhaps  the  best  known  of  those  employing  negro  operatives, 
is  said  to  have  been  burned  by  Federal  troops  entering  Columbia. 
The  ruins,  across  the  river,  about  three  miles  above  the  city,  are 
still  to  be  seen,  flanked  by  a  grove  on  a  small  plateau  overlooking 
the  stream.  The  foundations  and  maybe  one  or  two  stories  were  of 
stone.  The  race,  now  empty  of  water,  is  stone-lined  and  deep,  and 
huge  wooden  beams  and  parts  of  the  rude  shafting  remain  in  the 
wheel-pit.  The  dam  flung  across  the  river  seems  still  in  tolerable 
condition,  though  the  sluice  is  widened  by  years  of  neglect.  Mr. 
Kohn  says  the  establishment  was  hampered  by  lack  of  capital,  and 
quotes  Gregg  to  the  effect  that  the  capitalization  of  the  plant  was 
not  more  than  sufficient  to  pay  for  the  expensive  dam  (Cotton  Mills 
of  S.  C,  p.  17).  Except  in  the  weaving  department,  blacks  were 
employed  in  the  DeKalb  factory  in  South  Carolina  for  several  years, 
thirty  belonging  to  the  company,  which  thought  they  compared 
favorably  with  white  operatives.  Wages  of  negroes  were  1854  cents 
a  day  and  board ;  whites  who  succeeded  them,  exclusive  of  the 
weavers,  were  given  from  13  to  36  cents  a  day.  References  to 
wages  in  old  mills  in  Georgia  and  Alabama  seem  to  indicate  that 
there  must  have  been  some  negro  employes  (Ingle,  pp.  75-76).  Cf. 
Kohn,  ibid.,  p.  16. 

101  Industrial  Resources,  vol.  ii,  p.  124. 


319]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  213 

be  concluded  that  slave  operatives  in  ante-bellum  mills  were 
common.  The  attempt  of  Alexander  and  Haskell,  both 
perfectly  familiar  with  the  negro  and  the  economic  condi- 
tions prevailing  in  South  Carolina  at  that  time,  to  employ 
blacks  in  the  Congaree  Mill,  the  first  erected  in  Columbia 
after  the  war,  must  indicate  that  they  were  repeating  a 
familiar  practice.102  It  will  be  seen  presently  that  the  rare 
later  efforts  to  use  negroes  were  considered  experimental 
and  watched  with  doubt  by  outsiders. 

It  must  be  observed  that,  partly  as  a  suggestion  from  pre- 
war usages,  partly  as  an  evidence  of  disposition  sometimes 
shown  to  overlook  the  labor  supply  so  naturally  found  in 
the  poor  whites,  and  partly  springing  from  the  speculative 
frame  of  mind  that  prevailed  just  before  the  industry  took 
its  real  rise,  the  possibility  of  employing  negroes  in  cotton 
mills  was  much  in  the  air  in  1880,  certainly  in  South  Caro- 
lina. The  chief  source  of  information,  the  Blackman  Re- 
port, contains  clear  indication  of  the  activity  with  which  the 
public  imagination  was  working  at  the  time.  Few  new 
mills  were  building;  the  remoter  history  of  the  industry 
had  lapsed  for  the  moment  into  the  background;  the  new 
development  had  not  commenced.  In  contemplating  the 
mills  then  in  operation,  there  was  the  feeling  that  they  were 
not  important  as  types  of  the  past  nor  as  presages  of  what 
was  to  come.  That  there  was  to  be  a  new  story  there  was  no 
doubt.  Thus  in  this  interval  between  sterile  past  and  dy- 
namic future,  inquiries  might  be  poorly  informed  and  an- 
swers afterwards  shown  to  be  mistaken — very  often  the 
creeping  of  the  chrysalis  from  the  old  cocoon  was  not 
noticed.  But  knowledge  was  being  gathered,  stock  was 
being  taken,  resolve  was  forming  to  meet  the  challenge  that 
was  rightly  guessed  to  be  impending. 

The  Blackman  survey  of  cotton  mills  operating  in  South 

102  William  Banks,  int.,  Columbia.  The  experiment  lasted  a  year 
or  more,  but  the  negroes  were  found  to  be  poorly  adapted  to  the 
work;  a  fire  disabled  the  plant  after  this  trial,  and  it  was  converted 
into  a  warehouse.  Cf.  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  24,  and 
Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  pp.  109-110. 


214  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [32O 

Carolina  in  1880,  made  for  the  News  and  Courier,  while 
rarely  mentioning  the  finding  of  negroes  in  the  factories 
then,  often  comments  upon  the  exclusive  employment  of 
whites.103  Probably  ante-bellum  experience  was  respon- 
sible for  survival  of  negro  operatives  in  the  Saluda  Cotton 
Factory.  Blackman  found  in  this  mill  a  hundred  opera- 
tives, twenty-five  of  whom  were  colored,  ranging  in  age 
from  eight  years  up.  Operatives  lived  in  homes  owned  by 
the  factory.  Asked  as  to  the  feasibility  of  employing  negro 
operatives,  the  superintendent  replied  that  "  at  his  factory 
he  had  worked  mixed  operatives  with  great  advantage.  The 
negro  was  as  capable  of  instruction  in  the  business  as  the 
white  male  or  female,  and  could  afford  to  work  much 
cheaper,  as  they  lived  so  much  cheaper.  The  negro  labor 
he  found  was  easily  controlled.  .  .  ."104 

Blackman  in  his  visits  to  the  mills  had  a  stock  question 
designed  to  bring  out  the  pros  and  cons  of  negro  labor.  He 
received  answers  from  which  it  must  have  appeared  pretty 
evident  that  negroes  were  not  destined  to  play  a  progressive 
part  in  the  history  of  the  industry.  These  discouraging 
replies  were  based  on  disbelief  in  the  suitability  of  working 
negroes  and  whites  together,  on  the  inadaptability  of  ne- 
groes to  the  employment,  and  on  the  plenti fulness  of  whites 
offering  for  service  in  the  mills.  One  of  the  owners  of  a 
large  factory  said  negroes  were  not  apt  enough  to  learn  the 
business  properly,  whites  would  not  work  in  the  same  room 
with  negroes,  and  as  most  of  the  work  was  paid  for  by  the 
piece,  the  labor  if  mixed  must  necessarily  give  unsatisfac- 
tory results.105 

103  Thus  of  Glendale:  "The  factory  employs  120  operatives,  all  of 
whom  are  white"  (p.  10).  Cf.  as  to  Langley,  p.  7,  and  Red  Bank, 
p.  8. 

104  Ibid.,  p.  9. 

105  Ibid.,  p.  10.  An  officer  of  a  little  establishment  said:  "The 
whites  and  blacks  will  not  work  together,  and  we  have  an  abundance 
of  white  labor,  which  is  certainly  superior  to  any  class  of  colored 
labor  that  we  could  employ"  (ibid.,  p.  8).  Cf.  ibid,,  p.  11.  The 
summary  of  the  report  correctly  said :  "  There  is  .  .  .  considerable 
diversity  of  opinion  on  the  subject  of  labor,  but  it  appears  that  the 
preponderance  is  in  favor  of  white  labor,  as  more  dexterous  and 
trustworthy,  and  we  assume  that  this  difference  will  become  more 


32 1]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  215 

The  failure  of  a  mill  at  Concord,  promoted  and  managed 
by  a  negro  and  worked  by  negro  operatives,  cannot  be  taken 
as  a  strong  argument  against  the  feasibility  of  using  the 
negro  in  the  textile  development  of  the  South.  This  ven- 
ture was  tried  under  such  adverse  circumstances  as  to  make 
it  practically  without  value  as  an  indication  one  way  or  the 
other.  The  mill  was  projected  in  1896  by  Warren  Cole- 
man, born  in  slavery  and  said  to  have  been  the  illegitimate 
son  of  a  prominent  North  Carolinian.  Coleman  had  made 
money  as  a  merchant  in  Concord  and  had  built  perhaps  as 
many  as  a  hundred  "shacks"  which  he  rented  out  to  ne- 
groes; it  was  supposed  that  he  was  worth  as  much  as 
$50,000.  His  natural  father  is  reported  to  have  assisted 
him  to  get  his  start  in  life,  and  to  have  advised  about  the 
mill  project.  The  idea  was  that  the  factory  should  be  a 
negro  undertaking.  The  colored  press  commented  enthu- 
siastically upon  the  appeals  for  subscriptions  to  stock, 
$50,000  was  raised  and  the  company  organized  in  1897  with 
Coleman  as  secretary  and  treasurer.  The  enterprise  look- 
ing promising,  the  capital  stock  was  increased  to  $100,000, 
some  white  people  in  the  community  subscribing  to  encour- 
age the  effort.  Negroes  all  over  the  State  took  the  small 
sihares,  which  could  be  paid  in  trifling  instalments.  But 
many  of  the  poor  negroes  who  had  subscribed  could  not 
meet  the  payments — some  of  the  washerwomen  made  hardly 
more  in  all  than  their  investment  obligations  amounted  to, 
and  many  of  the  artizans  who  had  agreed  to  work  out  their 
subscriptions  in  assisting  with  the  erection  of  the  plant  dis- 
appointed the  management.  It  took  four  years  to  complete 
the  building,  and  when  the  mill  was  ready  for  operation, 
Coleman  had  had  to  assume  much  of  the  forfeited  stock. 
A  white  superintendent  from  Easthampton,  Massachusetts, 
was  employed.  The  factory  was  handicapped  by  second- 
hand English  machinery;  the  yarn  market  was  depressed; 


marked  as  finer  classes  of  goods  are  more  generally  made.  The 
difficulty  in  obtaining  operatives  is  not  great.  .  .  ."  One  superin- 
tendent had  declared,  however,  that  in  his  opinion,  a  mill  could  be 
run  with  negro  operatives  entirely,  directed  by  skilled  whites,  at  a 
40  per  cent  saving  (ibid.,  pp.  5-6). 


2l6  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [322 

other  Concord  mills  were  making  little  profit.  The  yarn 
market  pulled  up,  but  Coleman's  plant  failed  to  pay,  and 
ran  only  off  and  on  after  the  first  year.  Coleman  died  in 
1904  and  a  few  months  later  the  factory  was  sold  under  the 
mortgage.  It  was  said  the  negroes  made  clever  enough 
operatives,  learning  quickly,  and  the  manager  at  the  last 
attributed  the  failure  to  other  factors  than  labor — poor  ma- 
chinery, insufficient  capital,  unaccustomed  administration. 
Operation  of  the  plant  was  loose ;  sometimes  the  mill  would 
stand  idle  for  hours  waiting  for  cotton  or  fuel.  Some  of 
the  operatives  would  be  considered  good  average  workers 
in  any  Southern  mill,  though  while  white  spinners  at  Con- 
cord were  receiving  ten  to  twelve  and  one  half  cents  per 
side,  the  negroes  could  command  only  five  or  six  cents, 
making  only  about  $2.50  per  week.  Being  old,  the  machin- 
ery had  to  be  run  slowly  to  give  good  results;  the  negro 
overseers  showed  favoritism  and  were  harsh  in  docking 
operatives.  The  manager  believed  that  under  favorable 
circumstances,  near  a  city  where  more  intelligent  negroes 
might  be  gotten,  a  mill  could  be  run  successfully  with  white 
overseers  and  colored  operatives.106 

In  an  attempt  to  use  negro  hands  in  the  old  plant  of  the 
Charleston  Manufacturing  Company,  the  direct  manage- 
ment was  of  the  best,  capital  was  sufficient  and  the  machin- 
ery was  new.  But  because  of  peculiar  local  circumstances 
attendant  upon  this  experiment,  it  does  not  reflect  much 
light  upon  the  apparently  satisfactory  character  of  the  labor 
in  the  Concord  mill.  Before  telling  of  the  Charleston  expe- 
rience, however,  it  is  curious  to  notice  that  one  of  the  great 
pioneers  in  the  cotton  mill  movement  in  South  Carolina,  H. 
P.  Hammett,  in  1880,  answering  questions  designed  to  bring 
out  points  in  which  Charleston  as  a  prospective  manufac- 
turing place  was  interested,  predicted  success  for  such  a 
scheme  as  afterwards  proved  a  failure :  "  I  should  think 

106  por  the  story  of  this  mill  I  am  indebted  almost  entirely  to  Mr. 
Thompson's  "  From  the  Cotton  Field  to  the  Cotton  Mill,"  amended 
in  minor  particulars  by  an  interview  with  Mr.  Charles  McDonald  at 
Charlotte. 


323]  THE   LABOR   FACTOR  2\"J 

that  a  yam  mill  in  Charleston  properly  constructed  to  make 
coarse  yarns  alone  out  of  the  rejected  and  cheap  cottons 
that  could  be  bought  there  might  be  run  to  great  advantage 
and  profit  to  the  owners.  I  rather  think  negroes  could  be 
used  to  do  coarse  yarn  work.  I  think  that  they  could  be 
trained  to  make  very  fair  goods.  I  don't  think  the  labor 
would  be  much  cheaper  than  with  white  operatives.  We 
give  our  operatives  good  wages  and  take  care  of  their 
morals."107 

The  plant,  which  for  some  time  had  been  idle,  was  bought 
through  the  initiative  of  a  successful  up-country  manufac- 
turer in  cooperation  with  Charleston  men  who  had  been  in- 
terested in  the  former  company.  It  operated  first  with 
white  labor  and  was  a  failure.  After  about  a  year  it  was 
determined  to  try  negro  operatives.  Enthusiasm  of  much 
the  same  sort  as  had  marked  the  original  enterprise,  directed 
now,  however,  toward  the  opportunity  for  negroes  instead 
of  poor  whites  as  factory  workers,  was  evinced.  But  again 
the  projectors  relied  upon  their  own  a  priori  opinions  much 
more,  it  may  be  thought,  than  upon  assurances  proceeding 
from  a  study  of  the  abilities  and  willingness  of  the  negroes 
whom  they  wanted  to  employ.  They  felt  so  keenly  that  the 
plan  ought  to  succeed  that  they  did  not  inquire  greatly 
whether  it  would  succeed.  "  The  superintendent  of  the 
mill  and  myself,"  said  one  of  the  stockholders,  got  the  col- 
ored preachers  and  a  negro  ex-policeman  down  here  at  the 
bank  and  showed  them  the  opportunity  for  the  colored  peo- 
ple if  they  would  go  into  the  mill  and  make  good  operatives. 
They  saw  it  too,  and  as  far  as  we  know  did  all  they  could, 
but  they  couldn't  make  efficiency  where  it  wasn't.  The 
negroes  lost  a  great  opening."108 

107  Blackman,  ibid.,  p.  17. 

108  George  W.  Williams,  int.,  Charleston.  Another  of  the  in- 
vestors gave  a  similar  account :  "  We  were  assured  the  colored  people 
would  work  for  low  wages,  less  than  whites,  and  would  be  faithful, 
but  they  turned  out  to  be  just  the  reverse.  We  had  everybody  ex- 
horting them,  telling  them  now  was  their  opportunity,  and  that  if 
the  experiment  succeeded  here,  mills  all  over  the  South  would  be 
open  to  them.     But  when  a  circus  would  come,  they  would  all  troop 


2l8  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH         [324 

The  superintendent  declared  that  he  had  educated  3000 
negro  operatives  to  the  work  and  made  them  competent, 
but  that  on  any  one  day  he  could  not  get  300  of  them  in  the 
mill.  White  operatives  were  used  in  the  picking  and  card- 
ing rooms,  separated,  of  course,  from  the  negroes  up  stairs, 
employment  of  some  whites  being  necessary  to  provide 
enough  workers  to  run  the  plant.109  The  mill  operated  for 
about  a  year  with  negro  labor,  and  the  unsuccessful  venture 
was  discontinued.  "  We  had  the  best  management  and  fine 
machinery,  and  all  the  money  necessary.  It  was  the  labor. 
I  am  absolutely  convinced  it  was  the  labor."110 

The  failure  at  Charleston  had  the  effect  on  some  mill 
men  of  confirming  their  disbelief  in  negro  labor,  but  with 
others  did  not  daunt  their  faith  in  the  theoretical  soundness, 
at  least,  of  the  proposal.111 

away  to  it.  It  was  a  sight  to  see  them "  ( W.  P.  Carrington,  int., 
Charleston).  The  negroes,  shunning  "the  opportunity  of  their 
lives,  would  go  for  oysters  in  the  oyster  season,  and  then  for  straw- 
berries in  the  strawberry  season"  (Williams,  ibid.). 

109  F.  Q.  O'Neill,  int.,  Charleston. 

110  Ibid.  One  of  those  who  had  worked  hardest  to  prove  negro 
operatives  suitable,  said :  "  If  a  white  man  will  get  92  per  cent  out  of 
a  machine,  a  negro  will  get  76  per  cent  only  and  be  satisfied " 
(George  W.  Williams,  int.,  Charleston).  Mr.  Thompson  thinks  one 
reason  for  the  unsatisfactory  issue  of  the  experiment  was  that  the 
mill  as  worked  by  negroes  was  expected  to  pay  dividends  on  a  capi- 
talization enlarged  by  installation  of  new  machinery.  Mr.  Mont- 
gomery, chiefly  responsible  for  the  enterprise,  is  reported  to  have 
assigned  the  distractions  of  the  city  as  cause  for  the  failure  (pp. 
251-252).  A  stockholder  attributed  non-success  to  malign  influ- 
ence of  selling  agents  of  the  mill :  "  The  commission  house  took 
every  means  to  show  the  colored  labor  unprofitable.  Those  negro 
women  could  tie  a  knot  at  a  spindle  as  well  as  white  women  could." 
One  of  those  interested  in  the  company  still  believed  the  plan  of 
having  negro  operatives  was  abandoned  too  soon,  that  the  mill  was 
on  the  eve  of  making  money  when  the  machinery  was  moved  to 
Gainesville,  Georgia  (William  M.  Bird,  int.,  Charleston).  Cf.  Tomp- 
kins, Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  pp.  109-110. 

111  The  superintendent  of  a  large  up-country  mill  said  that  the 
superintendency  of  the  Charleston  mill  was  offered  him  at  the  time 
negro  labor  was  to  be  installed,  and  that  he  promptly  declined  the 
position.  "  The  negroes'  average  of  intelligence  is  so  low  that  you 
cannot  organize  them.  If  you  could  pick  them  from  all  over  the 
State,  you  might  accomplish  something,  but  taking  them  as  they 
come,  you  cannot  accomplish  anything"  (W.  J.  Britton,  int.,  Spar- 
tanburg). A  mill  president  of  Augusta,  speaking  of  the  prevalent 
belief  that  cotton  cannot  be  profitably  manufactured  in  a  seaport 


325]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  2I9 

Evidence  gathered  at  first  hand,  even  after  fifteen  years, 
still  bears  out  Mr.  Thompson's  observation  that  the  mill 
men  of  the  South  have  thought  of  negro  labor  in  a  specu- 
lative way  only,  as  a  remote  possibility  or  necessity.  Since 
Mr.  Thompson  wrote,  however,  the  South  has  approached 
measurably  closer,  in  common  conception  of  manufacturers, 
to  a  genuine  and  widespread  shortage  of  operatives,  and  has 
felt  this  condition  in  an  increase  in  wages  not  entirely  con- 
sequent upon  the  European  war.  Steadily  the  question  of 
employing  negroes  in  the  mills  has  gained  a  place  in  the 
minds  of  manufacturers.  The  hope  of  continuing  the 
favorable  labor  differential,  in  spite  of  child  labor  legisla- 

in  the  South,  gave  his  reaction  in  brisk  sentences :  "  I  have  no 
sympathy  with  this  view.  If  you  can  command  the  managerial  skill, 
and  you  can  surely  get  the  machinery,  you  can  run  a  cotton  mill  in 
a  seaport  as  well  as  anywhere  else.  At  once  Manchester  and  New 
Bedford  and  Lowell  come  into  your  mind — they  have  all  got  spin- 
ning climates.  In  the  South  there  is,  of  course,  the  labor  problem, 
most  of  the  operatives  coming  from  the  up-country.  But  there  are 
labor  troubles  in  anything.  You  will  have  labor  troubles  in  running 
a  shoe  factory  in  New  England  or  in  picking  prickly  apples  in  the. 
Zulu  Islands.  So  far  as  I  am  concerned,  if  I  wanted  to  operate  a 
mill  at  the  coast,  say  Charleston,  I  would  employ  negroes.  I 
wouldn't  work  them  as  those  people  worked  them.  I  would  not  pay 
them  half  as  much  as  white  labor,  but  just  as  much.  There  is  no 
reason  why  colored  labor  will  not  prove  profitable."  An  expert  in 
cotton  mill  practice  said :  "  A  negro  can  run  a  ginning  outfit  as  well 
as  a  white  man,  and  is  tickled  to  death  with  it.  The  great  trouble 
with  negro  labor  for  cotton  mills  is  poor  adaptability  to  organiza- 
tion. If  I  was  going  to  run  a  mill  with  negroes,  I  would  want  to  be 
right  on  the  ground  and  study  them,  and  not  follow  the  experiment 
of  trying  to  run  the  mill  in  Charleston  with  the  president  living  in 
Spartanburg.  I  don't  see  why  colored  operatives  cannot  be  used  in 
cheap  mills"  (J.  H.  M.  Beatty,  int.,  Columbia,  Jan.  3,  1917).  A 
superintendent  eminently  practical  declared :  "  The  only  trouble  with 
negro  labor  is  the  mixing  of  the  races.  If  a  mill  could  be  run  exclu- 
sively with  negro  operatives,  there  would  be  no  difficulty.  Why,  we 
have  negro  bricklayers,  tailors,  decorators,  and  these  do  handsome 
work ;  negro  women  are  good  seamstresses ;  there  are  negro  dentists 
and  doctors.  I  don't  see  why  piccaninnies  won't  make  good  factory 
hands,  spinning  and  weaving.  There  is  nothing  lacking  in  their 
capacity  to  learn"  (George  T.  Lynch,  int.,  Augusta).  And  a  mill 
official  whose  family  name  is  synonymous  with  the  founding  of  the 
industry  in  the  South  said  that  while  his  fellow-manufacturers 
would  want  to  hang  him  if  they  thought  he  expressed  such  a  belief, 
he  saw  no  real  reason  why  negroes  cannot  be  profitably  and  suitably 
used  as  operatives. 


220  THE  RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS  IN   THE   SOUTH        [326 

tion  and  the  entrance  of  trade  unionism,  may  lead  to  further 
tests  of  negro  operatives.112 

112  Cf.  the  writer's  "  The  End  of  Child  Labor,"  in  Survey,  Aug.  23, 
1919,  pp.  749-750.  Tompkins  in  1895  said :  "  It  is  impossible  for  me 
to  come  to  a  conclusion  as  to  whether  the  colored  people  would 
make  successful  mill  hands  or  not.  ...  I  would  be  willing  to  be  one 
of  100  persons  to  subscribe  $1,500  each  for  a  mill  to  be  operated  by 
colored  people  until  by  losses  it  should  be  determined  that  the  ex- 
periment was  a  failure.  .  .  .  This  experiment  is  important  to  the 
whole  South.  .  .  .  With  white  labor  alone  it  will  be  only  a  few  years 
before  we  reach  the  limit  of  supply.  Then  we  will  without  doubt 
have  the  same  laws,  the  same  experience  and  the  same  accessories 
[sic]  of  new  labor  from  various  sources  that  New  England  has 
had."  Foreseeing  child  labor  laws  and  legislation  governing  hours 
of  work  in  the  South,  he  felt  that  "  the  general  conditions  will  con- 
stantly approach  closer  and  closer  to  ^hose  that  have  been  already 
brought  about  in  old  and  New  England."  While  he  had  no  doubt 
of  the  negro's  intelligence,  he  thought  he  lacked  tenacity  of  purpose 
where  the  work  was  monotonous,  and  that  in  the  warm  rooms  of  a 
mill,  doing  light  work,  he  was  apt  to  fall  asleep  (Cultivation,  Pick- 
ing, Baling  and  Manufacturing  of  Cotton,  p.  11  ff.  Cf.  ibid.,  p. 
15  ff.).  Mr.  Thompson  wrote  that  "speaking  broadly  the  difficulty 
with  negro  operatives  is  not  an  intellectual  one,"  believing  that  the 
chief  failings  of  all  negro  labor  are  moral  and  temperamental.  Draw- 
backs are  dislike  of  the  negro  of  working  alone,  insufficient  ambition 
and  pride  in  his  work ;  daily  association  in  the  same  employment 
might  make  the  negro  less  respectful  to  the  white  man  (Cotton  Field 
to  Cotton  Mill,  pp.  240-250).  However,  this  student  admitted  that 
bettered  standards  of  life  might  enable  the  negro  to  enter  occupa- 
tions which  growing  scarcity  of  white  workers  must  open  to  him 
(ibid.,  p.  266).  Cf.  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features, 
pp.  109-110.  Relying  upon  disqualifications  usually  noted,  Mr.  Cope- 
land  concluded  that  "  There  is  little  likelihood  that  the  negro  will 
become  the  mill  operative  of  the  future,"  and  that  "  he  would  require 
more  supervising  than  his  labor  would  be  worth."  This  writer  is 
mistaken  in  saying  that  "  Before  the  Civil  War  the  use  of  slaves  in 
the  factories  was  occasionally  suggested."  As  has  been  seen,  they 
were  in  several  instances  actually  used ;  in  declaring  that  "  no  com- 
petent business  man  has  yet  ventured  to  make  a  real  test"  of  negro 
labor,  he  overlooks  the  management  of  the  mill  in  Charleston  (p. 
47  ff.).  Cf.  Uttley,  p.  45.  Mr.  Goldsmith  says  dogmatically  that 
"  The  negroes  cannot  be  utilized  in  the  manufacture  of  cotton  "  (p. 
10).  In  a  discerning  summary  of  reasons  for  non-employment  of 
negroes  in  the  mills,  Murphy  placed  chief  stress  on  the  natural  pref- 
erence of  managers  for  the  stronger  race,  it  being  often  difficult  to 
employ  the  two  together  (pp.  103-104).  In  conversation,  Mr.  Kohn 
confirmed  the  position  taken  in  his  writings,  and  emphasized  the 
hurtful  absenteeism  of  negro  labor  (interview,  Columbia,  Jan.  5, 
1917).  A  deterrent  to  the  employment  of  negroes  at  the  emergence 
of  the  mill  period  not  sufficiently  dwelt  upon,  is  found  in  the  bitter 
hatred,  born  of  political  and  racial  fear,  that  followed  the  war  and 
Reconstruction.  For  an  excellent  statement  illustrating  this  point, 
see   testimony  of   Lewis  W.   Parker  in  report  of  Hearing  before 


327]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  221 

Not  only  do  opinions  differ  in  regard  to  negro  labor,  but 
facts  point  in  contrary  directions.  A  hosiery  manufactur- 
ing company  which  began  using  negroes  in  one  plant  in  1904 
has  recently  installed  colored  help  in  two  more  factories, 
in  all  three  cases  due  to  shortage  of  white  operatives. 
Wages  of  these  operatives  run  from  20  to  40  per  cent  lower 
than  for  white  knitting  mill  hands ;  they  get  no  better  than 
80  per  cent  production  from  the  machines;  special  care 
must  be  used  to  hold  absenteeism  in  check ;  difference  in 
production  of  negro  and  white  workers  is  not  so  great  as 
difference  in  wages,  but  the  number  of  "  seconds  "  turned 
out  by  negroes  is  greater  than  in  the  case  of  whites.  The 
cost  of  supervision  is  higher  with  negroes,  but  under  prac- 
ticed management  their  skill  in  these  mills,  as  judged  by 
fineness  of  work,  has  more  than  doubled.  Negroes  offer 
themselves  in  sufficient  numbers  to  allow  of  some  selection. 
All  are  piece  workers.  Only  superintendents  and  foremen 
are  white.  The  judgment  of  the  manager  is  that  where 
white  operatives  can  be  secured,  negro  labor  in  textile  mills 
should  not  be  attempted.  He  could  readily  understand  why 
a  silk  mill  operated  in  the  South  with  colored  hands  had 
failed,  and  uses  negroes  only  on  coarse  work. 

It  is  pleasant,  in  a  study  such  as  this,  in  which  many  con- 
clusions as  to  broad  social  conditions  must  be  reached  by 
inference,  to  come  upon  a  part  of  the  subject  in  which  there 
is  an  absolute  expression  of  facts  under  consideration.  In 
speaking  of  wages  paid  in  cotton  mills  of  the  South  there 
are,  happily,  some  figures  to  form  the  center  of  the  discus- 
sion. Although  occasionally  distorting  the  image  a  little, 
the  wages,  in  the  instance  of  this  industry  in  the  South,  con- 
stitute a  mirror  to  reflect  complicated  economic  phenomena 
in  a  way  to  make  them  realizable  and  concrete.  Much  evi- 
dence which,  after  passage  of  time,  is  undiscoverable  in 
itself,  many  factors  which  no  one  would  even  think  to  look 
for  as  bearing  upon  the  problem,  are  unfalteringly  assimi- 

House  Committee  of  Judiciary  upon  proposed  constitutional  amend- 
ment giving  congress  power  to  regulate  hours  of  employes  in  fac- 
tories, April  29,  1902,  part  2,  pp.  11-12. 


222  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [328 

lated  in  the  wage  scale.  Wages  paid  the  operatives  are  a 
composite  photograph  not  only  of  the  state  of  the  industry 
at  the  time  of  its  commencement,  but  of  the  agricultural, 
social,  commercial  and  educational  situation  of  the  South 
at  and  just  previous  to  the  period  here  treated. 

It  will  be  found  that  wages  varied  very  markedly  from 
one  locality  to  another  for  practically  identical  work;  this, 
so  far  from  weakening  the  force  of  what  has  just  been  ob- 
served, strengthens  it,  for  it  has  been  impressed  all  along 
that  there  was  in  the  South  only  that  standardization  which 
proceeded  from  the  weight  of  poverty;  that  it  is  impossible, 
as  to  most  aspects,  properly  to  speak  of  industry  in  the  sec- 
tion as  a  whole,  but  only  of  the  particular  facts  for  separate 
communities. 

In  these  pages  regarding  wages  the  reader  should  keep  in 
mind  not  only  preceding  discussionis  in  this  chapter — as  to 
condition  of  the  poor  whites  before  they  entered  the  mills, 
the  generally  superabundant  supply  of  native  white  people, 
the  large  proportion  of  women  and  children  in  the  first  mill 
populations — but  larger  aspects  of  the  whole  study  as  well. 
The  part  played  by  labor  in  forming  an  argument,  selfish  or 
philanthropic,  for  the  building  of  factories;  the  earnestness 
with  which  communities  cooperated  to  raise  capital  in  the 
face  of  meagre  resources;  the  faith  with  which  projectors 
of  enterprises  reached  out  for  support  from  the  North;  the 
character  of  plants  erected  and  of  machinery  put  in  them; 
the  relations  with  creditors  and  commission  merchants* — all 
these  have  their  bearing.  If  it  be  true  that  the  cotton  mills 
of  the  South  rested  to  a  large  extent  upon  plentiful  supply 
of  native  white  labor,  then  wages  paid  to  operatives  afford 
a  convenient  indication  of  the  level  from  which  the  industry 
took  its  rise. 

First  to  glance  at  some  ante-bellum  wages.  It  is  said 
that  in  the  early  fifties  $116  per  year  was  the  average  cost 
of  white  labor;  then  average  wage's  on  the  basis  of  300 
working  days  amounted  to  thirty-nine  cents.113 

113  A  table  given  by  Montgomery  for  1831  includes  only  two  South- 


329]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  223 

In  1856  Olmsted  wrote  that  there  were  from  15,000  to 
20,000  spindles  running  in  Columbus,  the  largest  manufac- 
turing place  south  of  Richmond.  "  The  operatives  of  the 
cotton-mills  are  said  to  be  mainly  '  Cracker-girls '  (poor 
whites  from  the  country),  who  earn,  in  good  times,  by  piece- 
work, from  $8  to  $12  per  month."  Workers  in  all  Colum- 
bus factories  of  various  sorts  were  declared  to  be  "  in  such 
a  condition  that,  if  temporarily  thrown  out  of  employment, 
great  numbers  of  them  are  at  once  reduced  to  a  state  of 
destitution,  and  are  dependent  upon  credit  or  charity  for 
their  daily  food."114 

At  a  time  when  negro  labor  was  dearer  than  that  of  free 
whites,  when  slaves  were  better  looked  after  than  white 
people  doing  similar  work,  it  is  not  surprising  that  there 
should  have  been  no  social  watchfulness  of  the  conditions 
of  employment  of  the  latter.115 

Slavery  precluded  moral  and.  economic  alertness  on  the 
part  of  the  public.  As  comes  out  more  clearly  in  post- 
bellum  days,  it  was  a  miracle  if  there  was  work  for  mien 
and  women  to  do;  everyone  was  far  from  quarrelling  with 
the  terms  of  engagement.116 

ern  States,  Maryland  and  Virginia.  Average  weekly  wages  of  males  in 
Maryland  amounted  to  $3.87  and  of  females  $1.91 ;  male  operatives  in 
Virginia  received  $2.73  per  week  and  females  $1.58  (Practical  Detail 
of  Cotton  Manufactures,  p.  161).  Cf.  ibid.,  p.  133.  In  1849  in  the  DeKalb 
factory  in  South  Carolina  operatives  exclusive  of  weavers  received 
from  13  to  36  cents  per  day;  in  the  same  year  the  average  wage  at 
Vaucluse  was  37  cents,  most  of  the  hands  being  women  and  chil- 
dren; 300  hands  in  an  Augusta  mill  averaged  $3.05  per  week;  in  an 
Alabama  town  the  average  was  $8  per  month;  at  Columbus  the  pay 
was  from  12  to  75  cents  per  day  for  operatives,  and  for  overseers 
from  $1  to  $1.25  (Ingle,  pp.  75-76). 

114  Seaboard  Slave  States,  pp.  547-548.  "  Public  entertainments 
were  being  held  at  the  time  of  my  visit,  the  profits  to  be  applied  to 
the  relief  of  operatives  in  mills  which  had  been  stopped  by  the 
effects  of  a  late  flood  of  the  river."     (Cf.  ibid.,  p.  543.) 

115  Cf.  Olmsted,  p.  543. 

116  The  position  of  the  South  in  i860  can  be  fancied  when  it  is 
said  of  the  entire  country  at  the  same  date  that  "  One  or  two  states 
had  passed  laws  regulating  hours  of  labor;  but  none  had  thought  of 
the  cost  to  the  race  of  hard  toil  and  long  hours  for  women  and 
children,  and  most  men  regarded  the  builder  of  a  mill  as  a  public 
benefactor  because  he  furnished  employment  to  just  this  element  in 
the  population"   (Dodd,  Expansion  and  Conflict,  pp.  209-210). 


224  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH         [33O 

An  Alabama  cotton  manufacturer  declared  in  1878  it 
was  cheaper  by  42  cents  per  hand  per  day  to  operate  a  mill 
in  his  State  than  in  Massachusetts.117 

In  1883  a  New  Hampshire  hosiery  manufacturer  purposed 
establishing  a  mill  at  Columbia,  South  Carolina,  and  said 
he  could  run  the  plant  there  "  without  counting  the  cost  of 
raw  material  (which  he  could  procure  ...  at  less  cost  than 
further  North)  at  least  twenty-five  per  cent  cheaper,  in  the 
cost  of  labor  alone,  than  he  could  in  New  England."'118 
Major  Hammett,  showing  the  advantage  of  the  South  over 
the  North,  especially  in  the  manufacture  of  coarse  goods, 
estimated  that  the  difference  in  labor  amounted  to  not  less 
than  one  and  one  half  cents  per  pound.119 

A  writer  in  the  New  York  Times  observed  that  "  a  Fall 
River,  Lowell,  or  Manchester  operative  would  hardly  be 
able  to  live  on  the  $4  a  week  which  will  make  a  Georgia 
operative's  family  comfortable.  There  is  an  abundance  of 
native  white  labor  to  be  had  at  from  50  to  60  cents  a 
day."120 

Coming  to  a  typical  mill  of  the  early  eighties,  it  was  re- 
ported of  Clifton,  in  South  Carolina,  proposing  to  employ 
four  hundred  native  whites,  that  wages  would  amount  to  5° 
cents  to  $1  per  day.121  In  one  of  the  little  note  books  giving 
informal  estimates  for  the  Charleston  Manufacturing  Com- 
pany, there  is  a  memorandum  indicating  that  a  good  super- 
intendent would  cost  $4000  a  year,  and  "  Labor  25  cts  to 
1.50  pr  day"  with  the  additional  remark:  "these  wages 
paid  in  cotton  mills  in  the  State — good  authority  for  this 
statement." 

117  It  is  difficult  to  tell  how  much  of  this  saving  was  imputed  to 
lower  wages,  and  the  problem  is  not  much  helped  by  the  calculation 
that  a  4000-spindle,  125-loom  plant  in  Alabama  had  a  cost  for  labor 
and  mill  expenses  amounting  to  $63.44  per  day  (Haralson,  in  Burney, 
Handbook  of  Alabama,  p.  271  ff.). 

118  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Feb.  1,  1883. 

119  Quoted  from  Atlanta  Constitution,  in  ibid. 

120  Quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Nov.  5,  1881.  Low 
wages  were  ascribed  to  low  cost  of  living. 

121  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  May  21,  1881.  This  plant  had 
17,000  spindles,  500  looms,  and  a  capital  stock  of  $500,000. 


33  I  ]  THE   LABOR   FACTOR  225 

It  must  be  apparent  that  low  wages  paid  to  operatives  in 
Southern  mills  were  bound  up  with  the  low  cost  of  living. 
Remuneration  which  would  otherwise  seem  impossibly  small 
becomes  understandable  when  expenses  of  the  operatives 
are  seen  to  have  been  very  little.  In  order  to  know  the  con- 
dition of  the  workers,  it  is  obviously  necessary  to  keep  in 
mind  real  wages  and  not  money  wages.  It  must  be  noticed 
that  lower  wages  prevailing  in  the  South,  however  accom- 
panied by  greater  purchasing  power  and  by  other  payment 
by  the  mills  in  kind,  showed  the  less  advanced  economic 
position  of  the  South  as  compared  with  other  parts  of  the 
country.  Also,  the  standard  of  life  of  the  Southern  opera- 
tive was  lower  than  that  of  the  New  England  operative, 
and  however  completely  Southern  wages  allowed  the  for- 
mer to  reach  his  standard  of  life,  he  was  probably  not  so 
well  off  as  his  New  England  brother  who  saved  no  more 
money. 

In  estimating  the  real  income  of  workers  in  the  Southern 
mills  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  companies  made  up  a 
considerable  part  of  the  pay  in  goods  and  services  rather 
than  in  coin,  and  this  practice  of  the  early  establishments 
has  in  large  measure  endured  through  the  years,  affording 
one  of  the  most  striking  particulars  in  which  the  old  eco- 
nomic system,  born  of  slavery  and  fostering  a  paternalistic 
attitude  of  master  toward  servant,  of  employer  toward  em- 
ploye, has  persisted  into  a  new  day.  A  little  mill  in  the 
deep  country,  which  got  its  start  shortly  before  the  indus- 
trial era,  manufactured  the  coarsest  yarns  on  880  spindles, 
and  had  600  acres  of  cultivated  land  and  a  gin.  Twelve 
operatives,  all  white,  received  an  average  wage  of  33^2 
cents  per  day,  and  120  persons  in  all  were  dependent  upon 
the  factory  for  support.  The  very  low  pay  and  the  number 
of  those  looking  to  the  mill  for  a  living  occasions  less  sur- 
prise  when  it  is  learned  that  the  company  furnished  its 
operatives  with  houses  free  of  rent.122 

122  Blackman,  p.  11.    A  factory  a  little  larger,  but  otherwise  about 
similar,  on  a  waterpower  located  eighteen  miles  from  the  railroad, 
employed  65  white  operatives  at  an  average  wage  of  40  cents  for 
IS 


226  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS  IN  THE  SOUTH        [332 

Low  wages  were  partly  due  to  the  limited  money  econ- 
omy. Companies  frequently  could  easily  (bear  the  prime 
living  costs  of  their  operatives  and  their  families,  when  the 
equivalent  amount  could  not  well  have  been  paid  in  cash. 
The  smaller  the  quantity  of  money  required,  the  more  con- 
venient it  was  for  manufacturers  cramped  for  capital.  The 
company  store,  which  became  a  widespread  institution,  as 
well  as  being  a  necessity  in  isolated  factory  Ideations,  was 
designed  to  limit  the  amount  of  circulating  capital  required 
by  the  mill  management.  The  company-owned  village  has 
been  an  extension  of  the  company  store.  At  Piedmont,  with 
300  operatives  and  600  dependents  in  all,  $50,000  was  suf- 
ficient to  cover  the  annual  pay  roll,  including  salaries,  the 
average  wage  for  spinners  being  50  cents  a  day.  Opera- 
tives lived  in  seventy-seven  tenement  houses  furnished  free 
of  rent  by  the  company.123  In  such  "  free  villages  "'  many 
lesser  gifts  are  implied  in  remission  of  rents.  Often  wood 
might  be  cut  from  the  company's  land  and  cows  pastured  in 
the  company's  fields,  and  garden  patches  about  the  houses 
were  well-nigh  universal.  In  these  first  villages  of  the 
Campaign  years  poor  whites  from  the  neighborhood,  des- 
perate for  a  means  of  livelihood,  thanked  the  mill  for  all 
their  needs. 

Whatever  other  factors  contributed  to  the  low  scale  of 
wages,  the  primary  cause,  of  course,  was  the  lean  condition 
of  the  South  and  the  relatively  small  number  of  jobs  as 
contrasted  with  the  large  number  of  those  wanting  work. 
Wages  were  really  a  question  of  what  the  factories  could 
pay,  rather  than  of  what  the  people  might  ask.  With 
economic  progress,  as  agriculture  has  become  more  pros- 
perous and  industrial  plants  thicker,  wages  have  steadily 
risen. 

It  has  been  noticed  that  wages  varied  greatly  from  place 
to  place.  At  Crawf  ordsville,  for  example,  wages  were  33^ 
cents  a  day;  Fork  Shoals,  not  far  away  and  a  mill  almost 

spinners ;  there  were  200  people  dependent  upon  the  factory,  which 
provided  houses  free  (ibid.,  p.  13). 
123  Ibid.,  p.  16. 


333]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  227 

precisely  circumstanced,  paid  about  40  cents  a  day.  This 
is  attributable  not  only  to  want  of  knowledge  of  workpeo- 
ple in  one  neighborhood  of  conditions  of  pay  and  of  living 
prevailing  in  another,  but  to  the  extreme  provincialism  of 
employers  as  well.  An  important  factor  besides  was  wide 
variableness  of  circumstances  of  employment  from  one 
locality  to  another.  One  mill  might  have  operatives  for 
some  years  already  in  its  service,  and  as  unwilling  to  leave 
for  the  farms  again  as  they  were  not  likely  to  go  to  another 
factory  paying  more  wages ;  relative  proximity  of  a  mill  to 
a  city  or  town,  controlling  to  some  extent  the  agricultural 
rents  and  value  of  farm  produce,  and  the  ease  or  difficulty 
with  which  families  could  move  their  few  effects,  as  well  as 
the  outlook  of  the  people  upon  whom  the  plant  drew  for 
operatives,  would  make  a  difference  in  wages.  The  pro- 
portion of  women  and  children  employed  would  have  a 
vital  bearing.  These  things  influenced  also  the  operating 
costs  of  the  factories,  and  thus  indirectly  as  well  as  directly 
helped  to  determine  the  amount  of  money  that  might  Ibe 
paid  in  wages.  These  considerations  apply  more  conspicu- 
ously to  the  mills  of  the  seventies  than  to  those  of  the 
eighties,  but  the  distinction  is  one  of  degree  and  not  of  kind. 
The  larger  and  more  numerous  factories  became,  the  less, 
of  course,  such  forces  prevailed. 

The  summary  of  the  Blackman  Report  said  there  were 
2,612  operatives  in  South  Carolina  in  1880,  upon  whom 
8,143  persons  were  dependent  for  support.  The  amount 
paid  out  in  wages  monthly  was  $38,159,  and  the  rate  of 
wages  for  spinners  ranged  from  25  cents  to  78  cents  a  day, 
"  according  to  the  situation  and  the  character  of  the  labor." 
The  Valley  Falls  factory,  near  to  Crawfordsville  and  Fork 
Shoals,  mentioned  above,  was  making  profit  on  coarse  yarns 
although  the  machinery  was  old  and  "  despite  .  .  .  the 
great  disadvantage  of  being  situated  in  an  almost  inacces- 
sible region."  Fifteen  operatives  were  employed  at  an 
average  wage  oi  40  cents  a  day.124 

124  Ibid.,  p.  11.    At  Reedy  River,  a  larger  mill  in  the  same  locality, 


228  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [334 

The  only  indication  found  of  dissatisfaction  in  the  early- 
years  with  prevailing  wages  paid  is  that  contained  in  the 
following  item  which  appeared  in  1882 :  "  Last  Monday 
morning  four  of  the  'warpers'  employed  in  the  Rock  Hill 
Cotton  Factory  waited  upon  the  superintendent  and  de- 
manded an  advance  in  wages.  Their  demands  were  not 
considered.  They  were  told  that  their  services  were  no 
longer  wanted  at  any  price.  They  left  and  their  places  were 
supplied  immediately."125 

Hard  times  in  the  industry,  especially  in  the  Augusta  dis- 
trict, where  mills  had  never  seemed  to  ride  on  the  crest  of 
the  wave,  were  responsible  for  sharp  wage  reductions  in 
1884  in  some  of  the  largest  factories.  In  May  one  cut 
officers'  salaries  20  per  cent  and  employes'  wages  15  per 
cent,  and  another  reduced  both  salaries  and  wages  15  per 
cent.  The  policy  was  inaugurated  to  allow  continued  sales 
at  market  prices,126  but  was  only  partly  efficacious,  for  the 

the  average  pay  of  the  65  operatives  was  50  cents  a  day  (ibid.,  p. 
13).  At  Glendale,  where  60  per  cent  of  the  120  operatives  were 
women  and  children,  wages  averaged  67  cents  a  day  (ibid.,  p.  10). 
Langley  in  1879  made  coarse  shirtings  and  drills  as  well  as  yarns, 
and  paid  its  operatives,  two-thirds  of  them  female,  an  average  of 
78  cents  per  day  (ibid.,  p.  7).  Not  only  might  wages  vary  from  mill 
to  mill,  but  the  range  might  be  wide  in  a  single  factory.  Thus  at 
Glendale  the  highest  was  $1.50  per  day  and  the  lowest  12^2  cents 
(ibid.).  Persistence  of  variations  in  wages  between  mills  may  be 
strikingly  seen  in  facts  gathered  by  Mr.  Kohn  (Cotton  Mills  of  S. 
Cf  P-  43).  A  table  of  wages  paid  annually  by  the  mills  of  South 
Carolina,  and  of  the  capital  and  spindleage  of  these  factories,  pub- 
lished in  1883,  yields  little  that  is  helpful  because  "  capital "  some- 
times meant  paid  up  capital  and  sometimes  allowed  capital ;  a  com- 
parison of  spindleage  with  wages  is  not  more  helpful,  because  a  part 
of  the  wages  was  undoubtedly  paid  for  a  greater  or  less  amount  of 
weaving.  Two  mills  with  combined  capital  of  $600,000  and  32,368 
spindles  paid  in  wages  $180,000  a  year;  Clifton  and  Piedmont  each 
had  $500,000  capital  and  paid  annually  $100,000  in  wages,  but  the 
former  had  19,000  spindles  and  the  latter  23,000.  These  factories 
were  probably  making  a  larger  proportion  of  yarns  than  Langley, 
which,  with  $400,000  capital  and  only  10,000  spindles,  paid  in  wages 
$87,500  a  year.  Another  mill,  with  less  than  half  as  many  spindles, 
paid  $18,000  a  year  for  wages,  or  about  one  fifth  as  much  as  Lang- 
ley. The  factory  with  the  smallest  capital  was  expending  in  wages 
only  $2400  annually  (Columbia  correspondent  of  Augusta  Chronicle 
and  Constitutionalist,  quoted  in  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore, 
Jan.  18,  1883). 

125  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  23. 

126  Evening  News,  Augusta,  May  28,  1884. 


335]  THE  LABOR  FACTOR  229 

Enterprise  mill  soon  shut  down,  and  by  the  time  it  resumed 
in  October  the  King  and  Augusta  mills  had  reduced  wages 
25  per  cent.127 

In  the  history  of  the  industry  in  the  South,  increasing 
cost  of  living  and,  more  importantly,  growth  of  mills  and 
diminishing  supply  of  labor  have  given  to  wages  an  upward 
trend  that,  despite  lapses  and  spurts,  has  been  strong  and 
inevitable;  wages  have  advanced  not  gradually,  but  in 
jumps  mainly  as  a  consequence  of  accelerated  mill  building, 
though  wage  reductions  in  periods  of  slump  have  to  consid- 
erable extent  been  avoided  through  absorption  of  the  field 
from  the  factory,  the  opportunity  open  to  operatives  to  re- 
turn to  cotton  raising. 

The  low  wage  scale  paid  in  the  South  as  contrasted  with 
other  textile  sections,  notably  New  England,  has  often  been 
remarked.  The  advantage  flowing  to  the  Southern  manu- 
facturer from  cheap  labor,  partially  offset  by  the  lower 
price  received  for  Southern  goods  in  many  cases,  and  by 
inability  of  unskilled  workers  to  get  full  production  from 
expensive  machinery,  has  proved  more  persistent  than  that 
resulting  from  other  factors.128 

In  assuming  that,  in  real  wages,  Southern  operatives 
have  been  as  well  off  as  those  of  New  England,  it  must  be 
remembered  that  the  lower  level  on  which  Southern  mills 
have  been  conducted  has  involved  certain  very  definite 
social  disutilities  which  do  not  appear  in  any  calculation  of 
expenses  of  living.  Such  are  the  results  of  child  labor,  long 
hours  of  work,  poor  schooling,  mischievous  abetting  of 
harmful  politics,  a  contracted  economic  outlook  linked  with 
difficulty  in  working  through  the  mills  to  better  employ- 
ments. 

That  the  mills  have  brought  a  better  living,  generally 
speaking,  than  most  other  employments  open  to  the  people, 

127  Chronicle,  Augusta,  Oct.  21,  1884. 

128  Cf.  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  33  ff. ;  Uttley,  p.  56 ;  Thomp- 
son, pp.  152-153;  Tompkins,  Storing  and  Marketing  of  Cotton,  in 
transactions  of  New  England  Cotton  Manufacturers'  Assn.,  vol.  77, 
pp.  IO-II. 


23O  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH       £336 

must  'be  patent  from  the  comparative  ease  with  which  fac- 
tories have  obtained  labor.129  Apologists  for  Southern  mills 
regularly,  and  others  less  disingenuous  frequently,  have  laid 
stress  on  the  favorable  "  family  wage  "  received  by  opera- 
tives.130 The  error  here  would  seem  to  be  too  evident  to 
require  correction.  To  the  extent  that  the  head  of  the  fam- 
ily, certainly  if  assisted  by  one  or  two  other  adult  members, 
cannot  by  his  wages  provide  for  those  dependent  upon  him, 
the  employing  industry  is  socially  parasitic.  With  the  en- 
tire, or  nearly  the  entire  family  in  the  mill,  children  com- 
peting fatally  with  their  elders,  money  income,  augmented 
by  many  payments  in  kind,  has  been  only  about  sufficient  to 
support  tolerable  existence. 

It  has  been  observed  that  Southern  mill  wages  have  ad- 
vanced in  jerks.  Such  a  sharp  rise  came  in  the  years  lead- 
ing to  the  panic  of  1907,  when  the  increase  was  25  per  cent, 
more  or  less.131  Besides  paying  higher  wages,  many  mills 
introduced  bonus  plans.132  In  some  cases  these  were  not 
bonuses  at  all,  but  simply  wages,  operatives  working 
through  the  noon  hour  or  otherwise  speeding  up  to  earn 
them,  but  the  bonus  and  less  obvious  devices  took  on 
stronger  significance  in  the  hands  of  employers  in  the  period 
of  sharper  competition  for  operatives  during  the  European 
War.  In  February  of  1917  it  was  said:  "Few  industries 
can  boast  of  an  enterprise  which  would  actually  lose  money 
in  certain  lines  in  order  to  benefit  its  workers,  and  yet  that 
is  just  what  the  Loray  Mills  are  doing.  For  example,  they 
sell  wood  and  coal  to  their  workers  at  actual  cost  always, 

129  £f  Thompson,  p.  159.  Comparison  of  mill  wages  with  those 
in  argriculture,  here  given,  lose  force  from  the  consideration  that 
food  might  be  given  to  farm  workers  and,  besides,  account  must  be 
taken  of  the  depressing  effect  of  negroes  working  in  the  country. 
Cf.  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  50. 

130  Cf.  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  for  many  references. 

131  Cf.  Thompson,  pp.  159  ff. ;  Goldsmith,  p.  10;  Kohn,  Cotton 
Mills  of  S.  C,  pp.  33,  36  and  39.  Statements  of  increased  incomes 
to  specific  families  in  the  years  1902  to  1907  are  without  point,  be- 
cause of  addition  of  new  members  to  the  working  group  and  in- 
crease in  ages  and  skill  of  operatives  during  the  period.  Cf.  Thomp- 
son, ibid.,  pp.  148-149. 

is2  Cf.  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  49. 


337"]  THE   LABOR   FACTOR  23 1 

16 1  ,. 

"•   "?f 
but  during  the  past  two  months  they  have  been  furnishing 

their  help  coal  at  a  price  fifty  cents  per  ton  cheaper  than  the 
mills  actually  pay  for  the  coal  delivered  to  them."133 

Just  as  mills  have  had  to  compete  in  welfare  work  to 
hold  their  operatives,  it  is  clear  that  these  extra  concessions 
were  simply  a  convenient  avoidance  of  cash  payments.  It 
might  have  been  foretold  that  increases  in  money  wages 
would  not  be  allowed  to  stand  frankly  as  such.  The  event 
proved  that  these  were  usually  painted  as  "  voluntary  "  on 
the  part  of  the  companies.134  These  things  are  not  worth 
mentioning  either  as  naive  subterfuges  of  employers  or 
more  naive  efforts  of  writers  to  create  an  impression  favor- 
able to  hard-set  manufacturers,  but  are  interesting  as  show- 
ing now  a  canny  continuance  of  practices  which  were  sincere 
and  acceptable  in  the  earlier  history  of  the  Southern  indus- 
try. Wage  advances  were  general  and  rapid  in  succession, 
and  without  doubt  many  employers  would  have  given  these 
out  of  pure  goodwill  to  their  operatives  and  to  let  them 
share  in  enormously  mounting  profits.  But  it  did  not  need 
the  negro  migration  that  left  farm  vacancies,  unprecedent- 
edly  high  prices  for  cotton,  army  drafts  that  took  their 
thousands  and  war  construction  that  held  out  unbelievable 
wage  opportunities,  joining  with  the  first  concerted  union 
attention  to  the  South  as  an  unorganized  field  with  resulting 
strikes  at  Anderson,  Graniteville,  and  Columbus,  to  make  it 
plain  that  the  great  stimulus  back  of  increases  in  pay  was 
the  necessity  of  the  mill  managements.135 

133  Charlotte  News,  Textile  Ed.  Throughout  this  survey  and  a 
like  one  of  the  Columbia  Record  in  1916  are  any  number  of  similar 
references.  In  estimating  the  gratuity  of  the  mills,  it  is  well  to 
note  an  observation  of  a  North  Carolina  manufacturer :  "  Wages, 
though  mill  men  may  not  recognize  the  fact,  tend  to  be  determined 
by  the  cost  of  living  in  the  particular  mill  village:  At  High  Shoals, 
where  wood  is  $1.50  a  cord,  wages  are  less  than  at  Charlotte,  where 
wood  is  $4  a  cord"  (Sterling  Graydon,  int.,  Charlotte,  Sept.  4,  1916). 

134  Cf.  Textile  Editions  of  Columbia  Record,  1916,  and  Charlotte 
News,  1917,  the  writer's  "End  of  Child  Labor,"  in  Survey,  Aug.  23, 
1919,  and  Mill  News,  Charlotte,  quoted  in  Literary  Digest,  Dec.  9, 
1916. 

135  Before  these  phenomena  appeared,  Tompkins  said :  "  The  pay 
of  operatives  rarely  varies  in  the  South  with  the  price  of  goods 
.  .  ."  (Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  p.  55). 


CHAPTER  IV 

The  Role  of  Capital 

The  achievement  represented  in  the  rise  of  cotton  mills 
in  the  South  is  not  more  clearly  apparent  than  in  the  story 
of  how  capital  was  gathered  and  how  financial  operations 
of  the  factories  were  conducted.  Here  was  an  agricultural 
community  made  poor  by  war,  economically  disorganized 
by  Emancipation  and  estranged  from  the  capable  North 
through  Reconstruction,  face  to  face  with  an  unaccustomed 
task  needing  wealth,  concert  at  home  and  cooperation  from 
without.  No  new  industrial  movement  has  been  a  shorter 
time  an  the  talking  stage;  the  South  met  the  acid  test  of 
purpose  by  plunging  instantly  into  actual  performance. 

Investments  in  Southern  cotton  mills  increased  about  $2,- 
000,000  each  decade  after  1840  until  that  of  1870-1880, 
when  the  advance  was  roughly  $6,000,000 — from  $11,- 
088,315  to  $17,375,897.  The  figures  for  the  decade  1880- 
1890  reflect  the  suddenness  and  rapidity  of  the  growth  once 
the  undertaking  was  entered  upon ;  capital  trebled  to  $53,- 
821,303  and  by  1900  had  reached  $124,596,879. 1  The  for- 
ward leap  was  marked  right  from  1880.  In  the  fall  of  1882 
it  was  estimated  that  the  new  paid  up  capital,  not  including 
increases  from  earnings,  had  amounted  in  the  two  years 
previous  to  between  $15,000,000  and  $i8,ooo,ooo.2 

It  was  of  the  genius  of  the  movement  that  Southern 
capital  should  be  drawn  upon  to  the  limit.  It  will  presently 
be  seen  how  valuably  this  was  augmented  from  the  North, 

1  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1900.  In  such  an  aggregate,  these 
figures  may  be  taken  as  sufficiently  accurate;  a  local  estimate  for 
South  Carolina  in  1880  was  a  little  under  the  census  return.  Cf. 
Blackman,  p.  3. 

2  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
Sept.  2,  1882.  Cf.  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  March  8,  1883. 
In  Augusta,  between  1880  and  1883,  two  mills  were  built  and  five 
enlarged,  making  63,000  new  spindles,  2200  new  looms,  and  repre- 
senting an  added  investment  of  some  $3,000,000  (ibid.,  Feb.  15, 1883). 

232 


339]  THE   ROLE   OF   CAPITAL  233 

but  as  to  both  amount  and  importance  it  is  right  to  say  that 
"  the  chief  sources  of  capital  employed  in  starting  the  mills 
were  local."3  While  recognizing  the  extent  of  outside  as- 
sistance, an  acquainted  observer  accurately  said:  "The 
great  majority  of  cotton  mills  in  the  South  represent  the 
sacrifices  and  great  efforts  of  the  communities  in  which  they 
are  situated.  In  the  East  the  cotton  mill  is  built  from  the 
capital  of  the  rich ;  in  the  South  it  is  built  from  the  com- 
bined capital  of  many  of  little  means."4  It  has  already 
been  remarked  that  a  symptom  of  the  Cotton.  Mill  Cam- 
paign was  the  location  of  factories  in  towns  rather  than  on 
isolated  water  powers,  and  this  was  because  community 
enterprise  was  coming  forward.5  "A  most  gratifying  fea- 
ture connected  with  the  establishment  of  cotton  mills  in  the 
South,"  it  was  declared  in  1881,  "is  that  the  great  bulk  of 
the  capital  employed  in  their  operation  has  been  furnished 
by  Southern  people.  .  .  .  More  than  three-fourths  of  the 
capital  invested  .  .  .  has  been  subscribed  by  our  own  peo- 
ple."6    Southern  savings  were  almost  under  compulsion  to 

3  S.  S.  Broadus,  Decatur,  letter,  Jan.  27,  1915.  Cf.  Edmonds,  Facts 
about  South,  p.  32.    Many  interviews  supported  this  point. 

4  Testimony  of  Lewis  W.  Parker,  Hearing  before  House  Commit- 
tee of  Judiciary,  1902,  part  2,  p.  12. 

5  J.  A.  Chapman,  int.,  Spartanburg,  Sept.  5,  1916.  In  explaining 
how  a  place  without  wealth  could  establish  the  industry,  Tompkins 
overstated  the  fact  in  saying  that  "  every  one  of  the  towns  and  cities 
of  the  southeast  that  are  now  manufacturing  places  built  their  first 
factory  out  of  native  resources  and  without  outside  help"  (A  Plan 
to  Raise  Capital,  p.  25). 

6  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Sept.  1.  Cf.  quotation  from  C. 
C.  Baldwin  in  ibid.,  July  11,  1881.  "The  industry  is  distinctly  a 
home  enterprise,  founded  and  fostered  by  natives  of  the  State,"  says 
Mr.  Thompson,  who  agrees  that  90  per  cent  of  the  mill  capital  of 
North  Carolina  was  native  (Cotton  Field  to  Cotton  Mill,  p.  81). 
Cf.  ibid.,  p.  59  ff. ;  Augusta  Trade  Review,  Oct.,  1884.  There  is 
abundant  support  for  the  assertion  that  "  the  industry  taken  as  a 
whole  is  almost  strictly  a  North  Carolina  achievement"  (Charlotte 
News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917).  Cf.  ibid,  as  to  Rhyne's  mills  and  other 
instances.  Twenty  years  after  the  commencement  of  the  develop- 
ment, it  was  estimated  that  80  per  cent  of  South  Carolina  mill  stock 
was  owned  in  the  State;  as  will  be  seen  later,  some  of  this  had  gravi- 
tated South  from  Northern  hands,  but  against  it  might  be  set  off 
shares  held  elsewhere  in  the  South  (Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C, 
ed.  of  1903,  p.  32  ff.).  One  of  the  founders  said  that  early  in  the 
period  over  65  per  cent  of  the  capital  invested  in  South  Carolina  was 
native  (E.  A.  Smyth,  int.,  Greenville). 


234  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [34O 

become  cotton  mill  shares:  "We  may  look  in  vain  for  the 
dawn  of  an  era  of  enterprise  ...  so  long  as  thousands  and 
millions  of  money  are  deposited  in  our  banks  on  four  per 
cent  interest,  when  its  judicious  investment  in  manufac- 
tures would  more  than  quadruple  that  rate.  .  .  ."7 

Many  specific  instances  show  the  embodiment  of  this 
spirit.  The  considerable  cotton  industry  of  Columbus  was 
wiped  out  by  the  capturing  Federal  army  in  1865,  and  within 
fifteen  years  had  been  rebuilt  by  local  capital  to  the  point 
where  the  mills  took  nearly  17,000  bales.8  Right  after  the 
War,  a  Northern  observer  believed  that  Charleston  did  not 
possess  recuperative  power  for  its  rebuilding,  that  unless 
New  England  sent  energy  and  capital  the  city  would  remain 
a  wreck.9  Yet  by  1881  Charleston  was  leading  the  indus- 
trial advance  in  the  State  and  furnishing  a  model  of  home 
enterprise  in  the  Charleston  Manufacturing  Company.10 
It  was  declared  in  1865  that  all  the  mercantile  stocks  in  Co- 
lumbia, in  the  heart  of  the  devastated  area,  could  be  bought 
for  $20,ooo.11  In  a  decade  and  a  half  the  citizens  were 
buying  out  New  England  interests  which  had  failed  to  de- 
velop the  water  power  and  plant  cotton  manufactures,  sub- 
scriptions of  $55,000  being  received  in  one  hour  and  reach- 
ing $117,000  in  two  weeks.12 

7  News  and  Observer,  Raleigh,  Nov.  9,  1880.  Cf .  ibid.,  Dec.  24, 
1880,  as  to  Edward  Richardson.  "  I  am  tired  of  hearing  the  cry  of 
'  We  want  Yankee  brains  and  enterprise.'  We  don't  want  any  such 
thing;  we  want  Southern  brains  and  enterprise.  What  the  South 
wants  is  common  sense  and  action"  (C.  M.  Clay,  quoted  in  Gannon, 
p.  18).  Mills  before  the  war,  being  usually  neighborhood  affairs, 
regularly  had  local  capital,  ordinarily  from  a  few  investors  (cf. 
Thompson,  p.  51).  Perhaps  the  most  ambitious  suggestion  for  home 
subscriptions  contemplated  the  building  of  mills  by  groups  of  fifteen 
planters  who  should  take  $4000  in  stock  each ;  nothing  came  of  the 
plan  (cf.  Barbee,  Cotton  Question,  p.  138  ff.). 

8  Observer,  Raleigh,  Sept.  10,  1880. 

9  Andrews,  p.  3. 

10  It  was  said  that  more  than  three-fifths  of  the  capital  was  con- 
tributed in  Charleston  (News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  July  6,  1881. 
George  W.  Williams,  int.,  Charleston). 

11  Andrews,  p.  34. 

12  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March  17,  31,  1881.  Cf.  Char- 
lotte News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917,  regarding  Hope  Mills.  An  enter- 
priser in  a  small  South  Carolina  town  announced  in  the  local  paper : 


34 1]  THE   ROLE   OF   CAPITAL  235 

Not  only  was  a  large  proportion  of  the  stock  held  locally, 
but  it  was  chiefly  native  investors  that  actually  paid  in  cash ; 
it  will  be  seen  soon  that  machinery  manufacturers  received 
stock  in  return  for  equipment.13 

It  frequently  happened  that  after  local  capital,  largely 
from  community  spirit,  had  been  adventured  generally  in  a 
first  enterprise,  succeeding  mills  would  be  erected  by  a 
small  number  of  investors  as  private  establishments.14  Also, 
even  with  initial  mills,  stock  after  a  few  years  tended  to 
come  into  the  hands  of  the  larger  investors  who  had  been 
central  in  the  subscription.15 

It  has  been  observed  that  Gregg,  before  the  War,  plead 
that  the  dormant  wealth  of  Charleston  might  be  directed 
into  the  industrial  development  of   South  Carolina.16     In 

"  I  am  now  engaged  in  getting  up  a  mill  of  2,500  spindles  to  manu- 
facture yarn  at  this  place.  I  do  not  expect  to  seek  a  dollar  of  for- 
eign subscription,  but  I  want  our  own  citizens  throughout  the  county 
to  be  interested  in  it  and  to  help  me  build  and  operate  it"  (D.  J. 
Winn,  in  Sumpter  Southron,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charles- 
ton, March  31,  1881).  Cf.  ibid.,  Jan.  21,  25,  27,  1881.  "The  project 
of  establishing  a  manufactory  for  cotton  near  Walhalla  is  being 
mooted.  An  informal  meeting  of  some  of  the  citizens  of  that  place 
was  held  .  .  .  and  stock  to  the  amount  of  nearly  $10,000  was  sub- 
scribed by  the  few  present.  It  is  believed  strongly  that  as  much  as 
$25,000  will  be  subscribed  in  that  neighborhood,  and  if  the  people  of 
the  county  will  join  in  the  enterprise  as  much  as  $50,000  might  be 
made  available"  (ibid.,  Feb.  26,  1881).  The  instances  of  the  first 
mills  at  Salisbury  and  Laurens,  applicable  here,  have  been  recited. 
Mills  at  Rockingham  were  built  principally  with  money  from  "  home 
people"  of  that  and  adjoining  counties  (William  Entwistle,  int., 
Rockingham).  Cf.  Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  1916,  as  to  mills 
at  Greenwood,  Ninety-Six  and  Lancaster ;  Grady,  pp.  197-108 ;  Tomp- 
kins, History  of  Mecklenburg,  vol.  ii,  p.  198;  News  and  Courier, 
Charleston,  March  17,  1881 ;  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and 
Manufacturers'  Record,  June  24,  1882,  as  to  Southern  subscriptions 
to  Atlanta  Exposition. 

13  Benjamin  Gossett,  int.,  Anderson. 

14  Cf .  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  pp.  29-30. 
When  the  Charleston  mill,  which  had  been  peculiarly  public  in  its 
inception,  was  to  be  sold  in  1809,  the  little  group  of  intending  pur- 
chasers prepared  for  the  transaction  with  secrecy  (Bird  Memo- 
randa). Some  who  had  withheld  subscriptions  from  the  first  Salis- 
bury mill  went  in  on  the  second,  and  the  third  was  distinctly  private 
in  character  (Theodore  F.  Klutz  and  O.  D.  Davis,  interviews, 
Salisbury). 

15  Hudson  Millar,  int.,  Charlotte,  N.  C,  Sept.  4,  1916. 

16  Speech  on  Blue  Ridge  Railroad,  pp.  6-7,  29. 


236  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH       [j42 

the  eighties  his  wish  was  amply,  if  tardily,  satisfied.  It  was 
principally  Charleston  capital  which  developed  such  up- 
country  mills  as  Piedmont,  Pacolet,  Clifton  and  Pelzer,17 
and  many  smaller  factories  drew  partially  on  that  city.18 
Many  Charleston  men,  besides,  went  out  as  mill  builders. 

Gregg  succeeded  in  persuading  South  Carolina  to  grant 
limited  liability  to  incorporators  of  industrial  enterprises,19 
and  here  again  after  events  showed  his  wisdom.  When, 
during  the  Cotton  Mill  Campaign,  poor  communities  felt  a 
stirring  which  wealthy  individuals  had  not  experienced,  the 
companies  were  regularly  incorporated;  also,  established 
factories  wishing  to  enlarge  sought  this  facility.20 

Noticing  that  many  towns  which  despaired  of  being  able 
to  project  a  cotton  mill  yet  had  building  and  loan  associa- 
tions with  accumulated  cash  in  excess  of  the  amount  neces- 
sary for  a  factory,  Tompkins  took  the  lead  in  applying  the 
building  and  loan  principle  to  manufacturing  enterprise. 
Under  his  guidance  a  score  of  plants,  mostly  in  the  Caro- 
linas,  were  successfully  set  going;  the  instalment  payment 
was  usually  50  cents  a  week,  though  sometimes  $1.00  or  as 
little  as  25  cents.  The  mill  might  be  erected  as  capital  came 
in,  or  might  be  completed  sooner  with  money  borrowed  on 
endorsement  of  directors  or  notes  of  subscribers  used  as 
collateral.21     The  instalment  plan  did  not  come  into   use 

17  E.  A.  Smyth,  int.,  Greenville. 

18  Mills  at  Sumter  and  Anderson,  after  exhausting  local  resources, 
appealed  successfully  to  Charleston  investors  (News  and  Courier, 
Charleston,  Dec.  17,  1881;  Marshall  Orr,  int.,  Anderson). 

19  Cf.  Propriety  of  Granting  Charters  of  Incorporation,  p.  4ff. ; 
Domestic  Industry,  p.  16. 

20  The  South  Carolina  legislature  in  the  1882  session  granted  char- 
ters to  nine  mills  with  an  aggregate  capital  of  $1,725,500  (Manufac- 
turers' Record,  Baltimore,  Jan.  11, 1883).  By  1910  the  South  showed 
20  mills  owned  by  individuals,  13  by  firms  and  620  by  corporations 
(U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1910,  Cotton  Manufactures,  p.  44). 
The  old  subscription  list  of  the  Bivingsville  mill,  1856,  in  the  posses- 
sion of  Mr.  J.  B.  Cleveland,  of  Spartanburg,  contrasts  with  the 
model'  charters  explained  in  Tompkins'  writings  (cf.  Tompkins, 
Water  Power  on  the  Catawba  River,  p.  20  ff.). 

21  Cf.  Tompkins,  Plan  to  Raise  Capital.  With  a  mill  operated  be- 
fore all  capital  was  paid  in,  earnings  would  balance  interest;  some- 
times profits  were  so  large  that  a  plant  under  these  circumstances 
even  paid  dividends  (cf.  Thompson,  p.  82  ff.).     In  one  instance  half 


343]  THE  R°LE  0F  CAPITAL  237 

right  at  first,  and  was  generally  employed  in  modest  enter- 
prises.22 

Turning  now  to  financial  participation  from  without  the 
section,  it  is  to  'be  remembered  that  by  1880  the  Southern 
attitude  toward  Northern  assistance  was  warmly,  even  ar- 
dently cordial.  Willingness  to  welcome  help  of  Northern 
money  in  Southern  mills  was  a  test  of  earnestness  in  the 
new  program,  the  characteristic  mark  of  conquest  over 
hurtful  pride  and  estranging  rancor.  The  wish  for  nation- 
alism and  for  industrialism  on  the  part  of  the  South  was 
necessarily  one.  Immediately  after  the  War  only  the  wisest 
men-  championed  the  entrance  of  Northern  enterprise,  and 
found  the  up-country  far  more  favorable  to  this  view  than 
the  low-country.28  But  fifteen  years  afterwards,  Southern 
sentiment  responded  outspokenly  to  even  the  imperfect  sym- 
pathies of  Edward  Atkinson.24  In  connection  with  the  At- 
lanta Exposition  it  was  said :  "  We  have  in  the  midst  of  us 
the  raw  material  ...  of  a  magnificent  prosperity.  We 
lack  knowledge,  population  and  capital.  These  may  be 
slowly  accumulated  in  the  course  of  years,  or  they  may  be 
rapidly  by  well  directed  efforts  to  obtain  them  from  beyond 
our  own  borders.  We  advocate  the  latter  plan."25  A  com- 
petent interpreter  of  South  to  North  asserted:  "I  say  on 
the  strength  of  recent  and  extended  observation  that  what- 
ever of  antagonism  to  Northern  capital  may  have  existed  in 
the  South  has  disappeared.  I  never  met  it,  at  any  time. 
.  .  .""26  Grady  was  representative  in  regretting  "  that  our 

the  subscription  was  paid  down  and  the  balance  piecemeal   (J.  L. 
Hartsell,  int.,  Concord). 

22  The  mill  built  by  negroes  at  Concord  was  virtually  shut  up  to 
this  method. 

23  Cf .  Andrews,  pp.  79-80,  176,  320,  378. 

24  Cf.  Atkinson,  Address  at  Atlanta,  preface,  p.  4;  p.  8. 

25  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March  14,  1881.  A  country  cor- 
respondent declared  that  the  South  could  not  afford  to  remain  solid ; 
that  the  party  that  could  guarantee  the  safety  of  incoming  capital 
was  the  party  for  South  Carolina  (ibid.,  May  25,  1881). 

26  C.  C.  Baldwin,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  July 
11,  1881.  The  slave  States,  themselves  emancipated,  stood  "with  a 
warm  and  generous  recognition  of  the  right  of  all  men  of  every 
section  of  their  own  country,  and  of  every  foreign  land,  to  come  into 
their  territory,  whether  with  muscle  or  money,  and  share  with  their 


238  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [344 

brothers  from  the  North  have  not  taken  larger  part  with  us 
in  this  work  "  of  building  up  the  South.27 

Before  speaking  of  solicitation  of  capital  from  particular 
sources,  some  general  bids  for  outside  assistance  may  be 
mentioned.  Exemption  of  new  cotton  factories  from  taxa- 
tion, if  losing  to  a  State  a  few  thousands,  might  be  expected 
to  induce  Northern  capitalists  to  invest  in  the  industry. 
"  Once  here,  they  will  be  so  pleased  with  our  advantages 
that  they  will  never  think  of  leaving  us."28  The  wide- 
spread rebuttal  which  met  the  statement  of  Edward  Atkin^ 
son  that  he  "  could  not  conscientiously  recommend  invest- 
ments in  Southern  cottgn  mills"  showed  how  keenly  the 
South  desired  Northern  capital.29  "  Unfriendly  comments  " 
drove  him  to  conciliation.  Superiorities  of  South  over 
North  were  set  forth  in  a  business-like  way,  much  in  the 
manner  of  a  prospectus,  often  concluding  with  a  suggestion 

own  people  in  developing  its  riches "  (Richmond  Industrial  South, 
quoted  in  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Rec- 
ord, June  17,  1882).  "...  Southern  investment  encourages  North- 
ern capital  to  come  into  the  same  field,  and  the  rate  of  progress  is 
far  more  rapid  than  if  it  depended  on  either  Southern  savings  or 
Northern  capital  alone "  (News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Sept.  1, 
1881).  Cf.  Daily  Dispatch,  Richmond,  March  5,  1880,  as  to  North- 
ern money  in  a  railroad  project. 

27  Expressions  of  suspicion  were  rare;  a  small  paper,  out  of  the 
current,  said :  "  Well  enough  is  it  to  talk  about  repelling  Northern 
capital  by  discriminating  legislation,  but  far  better  have  no  Northern 
capital  than  have  it  holding  native  noses  down  to  the  grindstone. 
The  half-starved  mountain  wolf  refused  to  change  places  with  the 
sleek  mastiff  that  wore  a  master's  collar "  (  Winnsboro  News, 
quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  July  7,  1881). 

28  "  One  mill  owner,  himself  a  Northern  man,  stated  that  if  their 
advantages  were  fully  understood  at  the  North,  a  great  many  North- 
ern capitalists  would  make  investments  in  factories  at  the  South " 
(Observer,  Raleigh,  Feb.  13,  1880).  An  Augusta  correspondent  of  a 
Cincinnati  paper,  reciting  the  success  of  mills  in  the  Southern  city, 
gave  this  data  "  for  the  information  of  the  loose  capital  which  is 
floating  around  Cincinnati,  seeking  five  or  six  per  cent  investments 
.  .  ."  (quoted  in  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Jan.  4,  1883). 
Cf.  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
June  3,  1882. 

29  Atkinson,  Address  at  Atlanta,  p.  27 ;  cf .  p.  14.  It  turned  out 
that  above  other  benefits  of  the  Atlanta  Exposition  was  "the  confi- 
dence begotten  in  Northern  capitalists  by  the  astonishing  display  of 
material  wealth  and  the  opportunities  offered  them  of  making  perma- 
nent investments  .  .  ."  (Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manu- 
facturers' Record,  Sept.  28,  1882). 


345]  THE   ROLE   OF   CAPITAL  239 

that  "to  the  anxious  capitalists  tired  of  a  petty  4  per  cent 
.  .  .  such  facts  are  not  without  interest.  They  go  to  sup- 
port the  claim  that  the  Southern  mill  has  an  advantage  of 
from  10  to  20  per  cent  over  its  New  England  competitor."30 
Not  all  appeals  for  outside  help  gave  promise  of  realiza- 
tion. Such  was  the  "  Cotton  Syndicate  "  proposed  to  link 
Southern  plantations  with  Manchester  weaving  mills.  The 
abortive  project  is  interesting,  though,  as  indicating  how 
even  farmers  could  look  to  cotton  manufacturing  for  sal- 
vation.31 Some  Southern  men  made  active  hunters  after 
Northern  investors :  "  Mr.  D.  L.  Love,  the  pioneer  of  cotton 
factories   in   Huntsville,   lefit   for   New   England  .  .  .  for 

80  Atlanta  correspondence  of  New  York  Times,  quoted  in  News 
and  Courier,  Charleston,  Nov.  5,  1881.  Southern  papers  eagerly 
presented  news  of  successful  enterprises  in  order  to  attract  Northern 
attention  (cf.  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Nov.  23,  1882). 
"  We  are  persuaded  that  once  the  folks  in  New  England,  who  have 
surplus  money  awaiting  employment,  thoroughly  investigate  the 
points  Richmond  presents  for  a  safe  lodgment  of  that  capital  in 
manufacturing,  the  flow  will  start  this  way"  (Dispatch,  quoted  in 
News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March  25,  1881). 

31  Cotton  lands  lacking  value,  planters  requiring  capital  and  profits 
being  diminished  in  charges  of  middle  men,  the  National  Cotton 
Planters'  Association  of  America  in  1882  sponsored  a  scheme  by 
which  Southern  farmers  should  erect  spinning  mills  on  the  railroads, 
to  be  equipped  with  machinery  supplied  by  Manchester  manufac- 
turers and  operated  for  three  years  by  English  workers;  farmers 
would  supply  food  for  these  operatives  and  pay  four  cents  a  pound 
for  the  spinning  of  their  staple.  The  Manchester  men  would  be 
guaranteed  10  per  cent  profit  on  their  stock  by  mortgage  on  planta- 
tions. Thus  Manchester  would  be  certainly  supplied  with  yarn,  the 
Southern  cotton  growers  could  borrow  on  their  lands  from  the  Bank 
of  England,  all  charges  between  field  and  mill  would  be  saved,  as 
well  as  interest  on  capital  for  buying  cotton  and  all  expenses  for  sale 
of  goods !  (cf.  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers' 
Record,  July  15,  22,  Sept.  2,  1882).  The  hardly  more  likely  plan  of 
the  Region  of  the  Savannah  Colonization  Association  has  been 
noticed  already.  The  frequent  reports  in  these  years  of  English 
manufacturers  or  capitalists  about  to  acquire  extensive  Southern 
cotton  interests  were  without  foundation.  Lumber  and  minerals, 
too,  were  said  to  be  constantly  on  the  point  of  English  exploitation. 
Cf.  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Nov.  10,  1881 ;  Baltimore  Journal 
of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Aug.  26,  1882;  Manufac- 
turer's Record,  Baltimore,  Nov.  23,  Dec.  21,  1882;  Feb.  8,  March  8, 
1883.  A  Southern  cotton  manufacturer,  English  by  birth  and  early 
experience,  who  has  seen  the  whole  development,  said  that  no  Eng- 
lish capital  came  to  mills  of  the  South  in  any  quantity  (William 
Entwistle,  int.,  Rockingham).  This  was  confirmed  by  Tracy  I. 
Hickman,  int.,  Augusta. 


240  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [346 

continuous  exertion  for  the  establishment  of  factories  in 
the  South."  Projects  for  mills  in  Mississippi,  Alabama  and 
Tennessee  were  declared  promising ;  old  enterprises  were  to 
be  set  running  again  and  a  Connecticut  manufacturer  wish- 
ing to  relocate  was  to  be  brought  to  Huntsville.32  With 
passing  years  welcome  to  Northern  capital  became,  of 
course,  more  wide-spread,  but  it  could  not  gain  in  sincerity.33 

Southern  overtures  to  Northern  capital  were  matched  by 
Northern  liberality  toward  Southern  opportunities.  It  will 
be  seen  later  that  most  Northern  support  came  not  from  in- 
vestors as  such,  but  from  commission  men,  machinery 
makers  and  from  manufacturers  establishing  plants  in  the 
cotton  fields.  The  impression  of  the  president  of  the  Na- 
tional Cotton  Planters'  Association  was  well-nigh  universal : 
"  I  have  been  for  some  weeks  in  New  York  and  Boston, 
and  I  find  capitalists  entirely  willing  to  back  any  scheme 
which  is  founded  on  any  right  basis.  Cotton  mills  are  espe- 
cially attractive.  .  .  ,"34  Ready  subscriptions  from  the 
North  to  the  Atlanta  Exposition  had  significance  for  the 
future.35 

Occasionally,  even  in  the  first  years,  the  mountain  moved 
to  Mahomet,  as  the  Southerners  must  have  viewed  it; 
Northern  mills  or  cotton  firms  sought  to  manufacture  in  the 
South.  There  was  even  an  instance,  that  of  Athens,  where 
a  town  by  embarrassing  delays  lost  the  placement  of  a  fac- 

32  Huntsville  Democrat,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston, 
July  30,  1881.  An  Atlanta  man  conducted  New  York  capitalists  in 
an  inspection  of  a  Georgia  water  power;  it  was  bought  to  propel  a 
cotton  mill  (Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  March  1,  1883). 
"  Outside  capital  ...  is  beginning  to  seek  this  Southern  field  to  aid 
in  a  more  rapid  and  thorough  work  of  restoration.  .  .  .  This  move- 
ment needs  a  wise  encouragment  by  public  and  private  approval " 
(News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  June  28,  1881). 

33  Cf.  Charlotte  Daily  Observer,  Nov.  4,  1897 ;  Tompkins,  Storing 
and  Marketing  of  Cotton,  pp.  11-12. 

34  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
July  1,  1882. 

35  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  April  1,  1881.  Cf.  ibid.,  May  21, 
1881 ;  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
Sept.  2,  1882;  Daily  Dispatch,  Richmond,  March  25,  1880;  Manufac- 
turers' Record,  Baltimore,  Dec.  14,  1882,  March  1,  1883. 


347]  THE  ROLE  OF  CAPITAL  24 1 

tory  by  a  New  York  firm  that  was  otherwise  certain.36  An 
interesting,  though  incorrect  view,  applicable  at  most  to  the 
South  Carolina  up-country,  has  it  that  "  the  first  movement 
was  from  the  North  to  the  South.  Northern  capital  was 
looking  for  investment ;  due  to  the  proximity  to  raw  cotton 
and  labor  it  came  to  the  South.  Camperdown  and  Bates- 
ville  had  only  Northern  money  in  them.  The  idea  began  to 
smoulder;  other  mills  came  into  being,  Southern  enterprise 
appealing  to  Northern  capital."37 

Unsolicited  transfer  of  capital  from  North  to  South, 
especially  where  plants  were  founded  outright  by  Northern 
interests,  was  not  prominent  in  the  opening  decade  of  the 
period.38 

Given  a  Southern  community  of  restricted  means  intent 
upon  establishing  a  cotton  mill  and  yet  unable  to  appeal  ef- 
fectively to  general  capital  sources  because  venturing  upon 
an  untried  experiment,  and  the  natural  thing  happened :  the 
local  projector  would  exhaust  home  resources,  likely  secur- 
ing enough  money  to  erect  the  building,  and  then  would 
ask  makers  of  cotton  manufacturing  machinery  to  take  part 
payment  in  stock,  and  apply  to  commission  firms  handling 
goods  to  subscribe,  usually  in  return  for  the  agency  for  the 
product.  Thus  special  inducements  were  offered  and  there 
was  redoubled  interest  in  putting  the  plant  in  operation 
promptly.  "  A  promoter  had  to  have  his  home  money  first. 
He  would  get,  say,  $50,000;  he  would  go  to  the  machinery 
men  and  explain  that  he  had  so  much  subscribed,  and  would 

36  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
Oct.  14,  1882.  "Mr.  Boyd,  a  capitalist  of  Providence  ...  is  in 
Georgia  in  behalf  of  several  New  England  capitalists,  and  is  pros- 
pecting for  the  best  place  in  the  State  to  erect  a  large  cotton  fac- 
tory" (News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  April  9,  1881).  Cf.  Clark, 
in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  pp.  266-267;  Dry  Goods 
Economist,  Jubilee  Number,  1896,  p.  79;  Murphy,  Present  South, 
appendix,  p.  317. 

37  Mrs.  M.  P.  Gridley,  int.,  Greenville. 

38  A  South  Carolina  town  refused  to  cooperate  with  a  Philadelphia 
firm  which  wished  to  build  a  mill  to  use  machinery  from  a  Pennsyl- 
vania mill  that  had  failed,  but  the  community  erected  a  factory  on 
its  own  account,  stimulated  by  neighboring  Southern  enterprise  (J. 
A.  Brock,  int.,  Anderson).  Cf.  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial 
Features,  p.  39. 

16 


242  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH         [348 

they  sell  him  the  equipment  and  how  much  would  they  take 
in  stock.  Commission  and  machinery  firms  would  give  him 
40  to  50  per  cent  of  his  total  capital.  If  a  man  had  no  pre- 
vious mill  connections,  his  local  subscriptions  would  be  his 
sole  backing.''39  It  seems  the  best  opinion  that  machinery 
manufacturers  took  more  stock  than  commission  houses — 
anywhere  from  a  fourth  to  a  half  the  price  of  the  equip- 
ment, depending  partly  upon  demand  for  their  product  at 
the  time.40  However,  as  will  be  seen,  commission  firms 
often  supplied  ready  money  for  working  capital.  Even 
as  to  these  predisposed  helpers  there  was  weight  in  the  re- 
flection that  "  nothing  so  attracts  investors  in  other  States 
as  the  knowledge  that  people  on  the  ground  have  proved 
their  faith  in  an  undertaking  by  putting  money  in  it."41 

39  W.  J.  Thackston,  int.,  Greenville.  "  In  most  places  where  a  new 
mill  is  proposed,  an  idea  is  prevalent  that  if  half  the  money  is  raised 
at  home,  then  somebody 'from  somewhere  will  furnish  the  other 
half"  (Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  p.  39).  This 
statement  needs  the  reminder  that  local  ponds  were  regularly  dragged 
and  redragged.  > 

40  W.  J.  Thackston,  int.,  Greenville;  W.  W.  Ball,  int.,  Columbia, 
Jan.  3,  1917. 

41  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March  8,  1881.  "  Books  have 
been  opened  in  Newton,  Alabama,  for  subscriptions  to  a  cotton  fac- 
tory at  that  place,  and  Northern  capitalists  have  pledged  $100,000  as 
soon  as  Newton  raises  $50,000"  (Athens  Banner,  quoted  in  Balti- 
more Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  June  24, 
1882;  cf.  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  March  8,  1883).  When 
a  movement  was  started  for  a  factory  at  Vicksburg,  nearly  $200,000 
was  subscribed  in  the  city,  and  it  was  expected  that  as  much  more 
would  come  from  the  "  East,"  and  that  these  latter  stockholders 
would  manage  and  equip  the  plant  (News  and  Courier,  Charleston, 
Aug.  12,  1881).  Commission  houses  participated  in  the  Charleston 
Manufacturing  Company:  "...  the  books  of  subscription  to  the 
stock  of  this  company  were  closed  yesterday.  .  .  .  Our  citizens  re- 
sponded well  to  the  call  made  upon  them,  and  the  full  amount  of 
stock  desired  in  Charleston  for  the  immediate  organization  of  the 
company  was  subscribed  .  .  ."  (ibid.,  March  16,  1881 ;  cf.  ibid., 
March  15).  Of  $500,000  wanted  for  a  factory  at  Gaffney,  it  was 
felt  that  $200,000  could  be  raised  in  the  county.  "  The  other  $300,000 
will  be  obtained  at  the  North"  (ibid.,  Oct.  24,  1881).  A  typical 
distribution  of  stock  was  that  of  the  Clifton  mill,  with  half  of  its 
$500,000  capitalization  paid  up ;  $50,000  was  held  in  Boston,  $150,000 
in  Charleston,  and  $200,000  in  Spartanburg,  the  latter  being  the  local 
community  (ibid.,  May  21,  1881).  Cf.  Blackman,  p  17,  as  to  Pied- 
mont. Half  the  stock  of  Langley  was  held  in  New  York,  the  other 
half  equally  divided  between  Augusta  and  Charleston  (ibid.,  p.  7). 


349]  THE   ROLE    OF    CAPITAL  243 

Sometimes  it  was  proposed  to  inaugurate  a  small  mill 
completely  and  then  seek  outside  aid  in  extension  of  plant : 
"  It  is  said  that  fifteen  thousand  dollars  will  set  in  motion 
over  five  hundred  spindles,  and  continual  additions  can  be 
made.  .  .  .  We  believe  there  is  money  enough  in  the 
county,  here  and  there,  to  make  at  least  a  modest  beginning 
so  as  to  attract  outside  capital."42 

"  If  a  Southern  promoter  had  no  business  connections  at 
the  North,  he  went  immediately  to  the  machinery  and  com- 
mission men  as  those  most  interested."43  It  will  be  inter- 
esting to  notice  some  details  of  this  soliciting  method. 
Many  Southern  mill  projectors  entering  uncertainly  an  un- 
familiar field  would  stop  in  Baltimore  to  call  on  the  com- 
mission house  of  Woodward,  Baldwin  &  Co.,  and  there 
were  given  a  kindly  reception  that  bolstered  up  self-confi- 
dence. "Many  times  we  would, not  know  promoters  that 
came,  but  going  about  the  South  we  would  hear  of  their  en- 
terprises. They  would  bring  letters  of  introduction,  and  be 
in  town  several  days.  A  party  of  gentlemen  might  put  up 
money  to  erect  the  building  and  buy  machinery,  coming  out 
of  the  arrangement  with  more  or  less  indebtedness  to  the 
machinery  people  and  lacking  working  capital.  The  propo- 
sition would  be  broached  to  us  to  take  the  account  of  the 
mill  and  put  up  sufficient  money  to  operate  the  plant.  In 
other  cases  they  would  set  out  to  raise  $100,000,  get  half 
this  amount,  and  come  to  us.    We  would  subscribe  to  some 


42  Winnsboro  News,  quoted  in  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb. 
8,  1881.  Cf.  item  from  Chester  Bulletin  in  ibid.  The  first  mill  at 
Gaffney  (the  initial  enterprise  projected,  referred  to  in  the  previous 
note,  did  not  eventuate)  had  $50,000  capital  and  5000  spindles  and 
drew  nearly  entirely  upon  local  resources.  When  a  second  plant 
was  built,  costing  $800,000,  machinery  firms  took  much  of  the  stock 
(H.  D.  Wheat,  int.,  Gaffney,  S.  C,  Sept.  13,  1916).  A  small  Texas 
mill  had  room  for  more  machinery.  "  Up  to  this  time  home  capital 
alone  has  been  put  in  it.  An  invitation  is  extended  to  foreign  capi- 
talists for  more  capital.  At  least  $50,000  more  can  be  used  to  great 
advantage"  (Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers' 
Record,  Aug.  12,  1882).  Cf.  as  to  Rock  Hill  Factory,  News  and 
Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  12,  14,  1882. 

43  Tracy  I.  Hickman,  int.,  Augusta.     Cf .  Copeland,  pp.  49^50. 


244  THE   RJSE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH         [35O 

of  the  stock  and  then  see  friends  who  might  be  interested 
in  the  project  and  secure  additional  subscriptions."44 

Sometimes  it  was  felt  a  commission  house  was  tying  too 
many  strings  to  its  offered  subscription,  and  its  assistance 
was  refused ;  on  the  other  hand,  a  firm  subscribing  uncon- 
ditionally might  create  an  impression  resulting  in  its  receiv- 
ing the  agency.45 

If  the  Cotton  Mill  Campaign  in  the  South  did  not  evoke 
great  outward  misgiving  on  the  part  of  the  New  England 
industry,  it  was  reflected  in  the  sharply  increased  business 

44  The  commission  firm  might  thus  lend  influence  that  was  as 
valuable  as  direct  participation.  "  We  generally  required  that  they 
should  have  local  subscriptions,  local  officers  and  local  board.  They 
usually  had  this  arranged  for.  Then  they  would  perhaps  put  in  a 
member  of  the  firm  of  subscribing  agents  who  would  attend  the 
meetings.  This  kept  the  commission  house  in  touch  with  the  mill, 
but  the  business  of  the  firm  was  to  sell  and  not  to  manufacture  the 
goods.  I  do  not  know  that  we  exacted  this  last  as  a  requirement. 
It  was  recognized  as  a  proper  thing  to  do ;  the  mills  wanted  it " 
(Summerfield  Baldwin,  Sr.,  int.,  Baltimore).  This  firm,  especially 
through  William  H.  Baldwin,  had  much  to  do  with  the  establishment 
of  the  industry  in  the  South,  and  everywhere  in  the  mill  districts 
one  hears  it  cordially  spoken  of.  Participation  of  this  and  a  Boston 
house  in  the  Charleston  Manufacturing  Company  was  representative 
(cf.  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  March  29,  May  17,  1881).  Much 
stock  was  secured  in  Boston  through  friendly  offices  of  the  commis- 
sion merchants  there  (William  M.  Bird,  int.,  Charleston).  Lock- 
wood,  of  Providence,  engineer  for  the  mill,  took  stock  and  influenced 
his  friends  to  do  so  (A.  B.  Murray,  int.,  Charleston).  Southerners 
who  had  before  hardly  more  than  seen  a  cotton  mill,  were  given 
rapid  acquaintance  with  the  industry  by  visits  to  plants  with  their 
Northern  allies. 

45  A.  N.  Wood,  int.,  Gaffney,  S.  C,  Sept.  13,  1916.  "A  Boston 
man  told  me  he  would  take  stock  if  the  King  Mill  would  make  col- 
ored goods  and  give  him  the  selling  agency.  I  told  him  that  if  he 
took  only  a  little  stock  he  would  have  little  to  say  about  how  the 
goods  were  manipulated,  and  if  he  didn't  take  any,  he  wouldn't  have 
anything  to  say"  (Charles  Estes,  int.,  Augusta).  As  the  market 
for  machinery  in  the  South  developed,  equipment  manufacturers 
became  readier  participants.  An  active  solicitor  who  placed  little 
stock  of  his  first  mill,  in  the  eighties,  with  them,  had  their  willing 
help  for  a  second  plant,  erected  ten  years  afterwards.  In  the  first 
instance  the  enterpriser  utilized  any  connection  he  had  with  men  of 
wealth,  however  slight.  He  approached  many  persons  he  did  not 
know  at  all.  Often  the  commission  house  for  another  Southern  mill 
would  be  appealed  to.  A  Southern  company  proposing  to  buy  ma- 
chinery outright,  likely  going  in  debt  for  part  of  it.  might  find  the 
manufacturers  willing  to  take  stock,  and  so  would  increase  the  capi- 
talization of  the  mill.  Cf.  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  March 
22,  1883;  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  April  6,  1881. 


35  0  THE   ROLE   OF   CAPITAL  245 

of  Northern  machinery  manufacturers.  For  obvious  rea- 
sons, most  of  the  machinery  was  of  American  rather  than 
English  make.  Unacquainted  Southern  spinners  could  not 
buy  from  a  distance  even  had  they  not  required  the  close 
credit  relations  which  domestic  machinery  men  were  ready 
to  give  them.  Just  at  first  some  second-hand  equipment 
was  installed,  less  from  desire  of  New  England  mills  to  put 
this  off  on  their  new  rivals,  than  from  innocence  and  neces- 
sity of  Southern  beginners.  The  number  of  Southern  spin- 
dles, which  had  increased  during  the  seventies  from  327,871 
only  to  548,048,  from  1880  to  1890  increased  to  1,554,000 
and  by  1900  stood  at  4,299,988;  Southern  looms'  in  1870 
numbered  6,256,  advanced  by  1880  to  11,898,  shot  up  in  the 
next  decade  to  36,266,  and  in  1900  were  1 10,01 5.46  Yarns 
that  had  been  selling  at  14  and  15  cents  went  in  1880  to  28 
cents;  established  mills  joined  with  new  plants  in  rushing, 
for  machinery,  for  more  money  was  to  be  made  now  in  six 
months  than  before  in  two  years.  Prosperity  resulted  to 
makers  of  all  equipment.47  In  June  of  1882  a  single  South- 
ern railroad  transported  twenty-two  car  loads  of  machinery 
from  Boston  shops,  and  the  same  manufacturers  notified 
carriers  that  they  were  working  on  three  hundred  car  loads 
to  be  delivered  by  early  fall.48  Shops  which  made  for  the 
Southern  trade  enlarged  their  capacity.49     It  was  reported 

46  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  1900,  Cotton  Manufactures,  pp. 
56-57. 

47  William  Entwistle,  int.,  Rockingham.  Southern  mill  men  did 
not  balk  at  the  high  price  caused  by  a  37H  per  cent  tariff  on  ma- 
chinery, though  it  was  occasionally  complained  of.  The  whole  in- 
crease of  business  of  machinery  makers  was  not  due,  of  course,  to 
the  South;  the  entire  industry  was  reviving  from  the  depression 
since  1873 ;  probably,  however,  a  larger  proportion  cf  Northern  mills 
installed  English  equipment. 

48  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
July  22,  1882.  Twenty-four  car  loads  came  to  Augusta  in  one  week 
for  the  King  Mill  (Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Jan.  18, 1883). 
Cf.  quotation  from  Detroit  Free  Press  in  Observer,  Raleigh,  Aug. 
31,  1880. 

49  Cf .  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
July  29,  Sept.  2,  1882;  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  March  8, 
1883. 


246  THE    RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE    SOUTH         [352 

that  in  two  and  a  half  years  after  1880  the  South  had  in- 
vested $12,000,000  in  cotton  machinery.50 

Southern  mills  with  new  machinery  throughout  (it  was 
quickly  learned  that  old  equipment  was  a  bad  (bargain  at 
any  price)  had  an  advantage  over  Northern  mills  that  con- 
tributed to  profits.51 

This  spurt  of  the  machine  shops  was  caused  both  by  anx- 
iety of  Southern  mills  to  buy  and  solicitude  of  Northern 
makers  to  sell.  They  were  kept  closely  in  touch  with  one 
another  by  trade  papers.52  Agents  were  sent  to  at  least  one 
Southern  State  to  encourage  the  building  of  mills.53  Mill 
engineers  buying  machinery  for  new  plants  sometimes  col- 
lected commissions  from  the  makers,  and  superintendents 
were  accused  of  the  same  practice.54 

50  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
July  29,  1882;  cf.  quotation  from  American  Machinist  in  ibid.,  Aug. 
19,  1882.  New  orders  were  being  chronicled  continuously;  cf.  Manu- 
facturers' Record,  Baltimore,  Nov.  30,  1880,  March  8,  1883;  Balti- 
more Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  June  17, 
Sept.  9,  Oct.  7,  Nov.  18,  1882;  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb. 
26,  March  4,  25,  1881.  The  demand  for  machinery  is  indi- 
cated in  the  fact  that  intending  users  met  the  makers  much  more 
than  half  way  to  investigate  the  Clement  Attachment  (cf.  Blackman, 
pp.  18-19).  Also,  worn  machinery  was  in  some  cases  transferred 
from  one  Southern  mill  to  another,  though  rapidly  depreciating  in 
effectiveness  (John  W.  Fries,  int.,  Winston-Salem;  Manufacturers' 
Record,  Baltimore,  Dec.  28,  1882).  In  this  connection  it  is  interest- 
ing that  some  New  England  mills  in  the  active  period  following  the 
Armistice,  despite  full  knowledge  of  its  drawbacks,  have  been  driven 
to  install  used  equipment.  By  1884  the  shops  were  over  the  first 
rush ;  times  were  disturbed,  and  this  idleness,  as  will  be  seen,  made 
them  anxious  to  stimulate  Southern  business  again.  Cf.  Chronicle, 
Augusta,  Aug.  24,  1884. 

51  Cf .  Southern  Cotton  Spinners'  Assn.,  proceed.  7th  Annual  Con- 
vention, p.  67.  Probably  no  Southern  plant  installed  altogether  old 
machinery  (H.  D.  Wheat,  int.,  Gaffney). 

52  Cf.  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Rec- 
ord, June  10,  July  15,  Aug.  5,  Sept.  30,  1882;  Manufacturers'  Rec- 
ord, Baltimore,  March  1,  29,  1883. 

53  Thompson,  pp.  65-66. 

54  Charles  Estes,  int.,  Augusta.  Equipment  manufacturers  might 
supply  building  plans  to  companies  which  did  not  engage  an  engi- 
neer (William  Entwistle,  int.,  Rockingham).  Besides,  it  was  said 
in  1882  that  a  dozen  young  Southerners  were  gaining  experience  in 
Lowell  machine  shops,  to  be  able  to  operate  mills  at  home  afterwards 
(Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  Aug. 
26,  1882). 


353]  THE  ROLE  OF  CAPITAL  247 

The  principal  difference  between  the  participation!  of 
commission  houses  and  machinery  makers  lies  in  the  fact 
that  the  former  regularly  retained  their  stock  in  Southern 
mills,  whereas  the  latter  realized  upon  their  holdings  as 
soon  as  possible.  The  one  group,  therefore,  so  far  as  con- 
cerns investment,  had  a  continuing  and  the  other  a  passing 
connection  with  the  industry.  Machinery  men  accepted 
stock  simply  in  order  to  sell  their  product ;  having  no  rela- 
tion to  the  output  of  the  factories,  they  had  no  wish  for  a 
voice  in  their  conduct.55 

It  is  generally  declared  that  Southern  mills  have  no  com- 
plaint against  their  treatment  'by  machinery  firms,  these 
having  been  liberal  and  cooperative,  except  that  the  industry 
as  a  whole  and  individual  plants  were  encouraged  to  ex- 
pand beyond  wise  limits  to  create  a  market  for  equipment.56 

55  Confirmation  of  this  point  is  universal.  Sometimes  they  would 
sell  immediately  at  a  discount,  having  loaded  the  price  of  the  ma- 
chinery to  compensate  for  this  loss ;  sometimes  they  waited  longer, 
but  rarely  held  on  for  dividends  (interviews  with  Summerfield  Bald- 
win, Jr.,  Baltimore;  W.  W.  Ball,  Columbia,  Jan.  3,  1917;  Sterling 
Graydon,  Charlotte;  J.  W.  Norwood,  Greenville,  S.  C,  Sept.  9,  1916; 
Joseph  H.  Separk,  Gastonia ;  F.  Q.  O'Neill,  Charleston,  Dec.  27,  1916). 
"  The  machinery  men  sold  out  at  94  or  95.  I  told  them  to  retain 
their  stock,  that  it  would  be  profitable.  But  they  replied  that  to  sell 
was  their  practice"  (William  Entwistle.  int.,  Rockingham).  Most 
of  the  shares  thus  thrown  on  the  market  came  into  local  ownership. 
"  At  a  South  Carolina  print-cloth  mill  I  was  told  that  62  per  cent 
of  the  stock  was  originally  held  by  Northern  machinists,  but  that 
by  now  it  had  all  come  South  again  and  was  held  to  a  large  extent 
locally"  (see  T.  W.  Uttley,  Cotton  Spinning  and  Manufacturing  in 
U.  S.,  pp.  46-47).  Sometimes,  certainly  in  South  Carolina,  when  a 
mill  was  to  be  built,  dealers  in  tin,  lumber,  brick  and  paint  would  be 
asked  how  much  stock  they  would  take  if  awarded  contracts  (J.  B. 
Cleveland,  int.,  Spartanburg,  Sept.  8,  1916).  It  is  likely  that  such 
shares  were  quickly  resold. 

56  David  Clark,  int.,  Charlotte ;  J.  W.  Norwood,  int.,  Greenville. 
South  Carolina  mills,  with  capital  in  larger  units,  may  have  suffered 
more  in  this  regard  than  North  Carolina  plants.  It  is  said  that  re- 
bates and  other  benefits  were  given  to  purchasers  of  machinery  for 
cash,  while  buyers  on  time  were  assured  the  latter  was  as  advan- 
tageous a  plan.  Tompkins  was  the  Southern  representative  of  many 
machinery  firms ;  besides  plants  that  he  built  outright,  he  equipped 
perhaps  150  mills.  Both  as  commercial  agent  and  as  publicist  he 
encouraged  erection  of  factories,  but  never  with  any  hint  of  chi- 
canery attaching  to  his  activities,  though  he  was  obliged  to  have 
some  factories  sold  for  debt  (Sterling  Graydon,  int.,  Charlotte). 
Not  all  agents  have  had  this  record ;  a  North  Carolina  mill  had  to 


248  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [[354 

A  common  failing  of  the  mills,  in  the  train  of  which  came 
many  embarrassments  and  drawbacks,  was1  lack  of  work- 
ing capital.  This  was  due  partly  to  insufficiency  of  ready 
money  in  the  South,  partly  to  need  of  large  sums  for  pur- 
chase of  quantities  of  cotton  for  coarse  spinning,  and  was 
not  unconnected,  perhaps,  with  willingness  of  a  community 
unacquainted  with  industry  to  rest  satisfied  when  visible  in- 
vestment had  been  cared  for.  Also,  original  provision  for 
enlargement  of  plant,  while  ultimately  economical,  was  im- 
mediately expensive,  rendering  some  capital  unproductive.57 
Tompkins  was  giving  advice  for  the  typical1  enterprise 
when  he  counselled  that  $75,000  was  the  least  that  should 
be  subscribed  for  a  mill  in  a  new  section,  and  that  while  this 
did  not  allow  of  10  to  20  per  cent  of  capital  stock  being  set 
aside  for  working  capital,  as  was  wisest,  still  most  com- 
panies started  without  this  facility,  either  borrowing  from  a 
home  bank  or  consigning  product  to  a  commission  house 
and  drawing  against  it  for  75  to  90  per  cent  of  its  value. 
So  far  from  possessing  running  capital,  mills  often  began 
operation  with  indebtedness  on  the  plant.58 

be  reorganized  before  it  commenced  operation,  and  while  local  in- 
vestors were  scared  off  by  the  project  to  double  its  spindleage, 
machinery  manufacturers  encouraged  the  enlargement  and  took  pre- 
ferred stock,  of  which  there  came  to  be  an  actual  majority.  A  ma- 
chinery representative  is  president.  The  mill  is  less  successful  than 
those  about  it. 

57  Southern  cotton  factories  from  the  beginning  have  developed 
water  power,  installed  boilers  and  erected  buildings  with  a  view  to 
extension ;  this  showed  as  much  faith  in  the  future  of  the  industry 
on  the  part  of  projectors  as  it  did  solicitude  for  future  work  on 
the  part  of  engineers  and  machinery  manufacturers  supplying  plans 
(cf.  Uttley,  p.  47).  Sixty-four  per  cent  of  new  spindles  in  1903  were 
credited  to  established  mills  (ibid.,  p.  44).  A  25,000-spindle,  600- 
loom  mill  that  cost,  with  provision  for  15,000  more  spindles  and 
their  complement  of  looms,  $28.65  per  spindle,  was  to  cost,  when 
fully  equipped,  $16  per  spindle  (ibid.,  p.  48).  Here  was  a  wider 
difference  than  Tompkins  calculated  when  he  said  that  building  with 
a  view  to  doubling  capacity  would  cost  about  7  per  cent  more  at  the 
outset  (Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  p.  51  ff.).  For  typical 
instances  at  the  opening  of  the  period,  cf.  Baltimore  Journal  of 
Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record,  July  22,  1882,  as  to  Rome 
Cotton  Factory,  and  ibid.,  Oct.  28,  1882,  as  to  Huguenot  Mill. 

58  "The  capital  proposed  for  the  Darlington  mill  is  $280,000.  Of 
this  $140,000  has  been  subscribed  and  the  work  of  construction  be- 
gun" (News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  "South  Carolina  in  1884"). 


35  5D  THE  ROLE  OF  CAPITAL  249 

Hurtful  refusal  of  Southern  banks  to  cash  drafts  for 
goods  sold  directly  to  Southern  merchants,  remarked  by  a 
Virginia  governor  in  the  fifties,59  became  a  no  less  compro- 
mising inability  to  finance  the  industry  in  the  eighties.  Nor 
could  Southern  mills  look  to  Northern  banks — the  industry 
was  too  untried,  the  banks  too  far  away.  The  factories 
needed  friends  at  court,  agencies  involved  in  the  future  of 
the  new  enterprises.  Commission  firms  were  the  natural 
resort.  Said  a  manufacturer  not  liking  this  recourse :  "  The 
Yankees  asserted  first  we  could  not  run  because  of  climate. 
We  did  it.  Then  they  said  we  could  make  coarse  goods, 
but  not  fine  goods.  Well,  we  are  doing  it.  The  North 
made  two  guesses  out  of  three,  and  was  mistaken  in  them. 
It  did  not  make  the  guess  that  we  could  not  run  without 
money.  But  you  find  Southern  mills  failing  and  going  to 
the  Eastern  men  to  whom  they  were  in  debt."60 

Believing  need  for  working  capital  had  led  mills  into 
damaging  connections  with  agents  for  goods,  it  was  declared 
that  companies  would  have  done  better  to  depart  from 
practice  and  issue  bonds  at  the  outset  to  provide  themselves 

"  One  of  the  special  disadvantages  under  which  Southern  mills  have 
to  work  is  that  often  they  have  very  little  working  capital  and  at 
the  beginning  think  that  all  they  have  to  do  is  to  pay  for  the  mill, 
if,  indeed,  they  do  that"  (S.  S.  Broadus,  Decatur,  letter).  "Most 
Southern  mills  when  built  had  to  borrow  their  total  working  capital, 
and  this  is  still  done.  Many  borrowed  to  build  the  plant.  It  is  not 
wrong  for  a  mill  to  borrow  a  little  fixed  capital,  say  $3  or  $4  on  the 
spindle"  (Summerfield  Baldwin,  Jr.,  int.,  Baltimore). 

59  Cf.  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  p.  324. 

60  J.  H.  M.  Beatty,  int.,  Columbia.  Mr.  Copelandhas  recognized 
that  "  It  is  available  cash  rather  than  geographical  location,  which 
determines  who  will  be  able  to  buy  cotton  when  the  price  falls  "  (see 
PP-  36-37)-  "The  unsuccessful  mills  are  often  so  because  of  slavery 
to  the  commission  houses  through  which  they  sell  their  product. 
Too  many  Southern  mills  have  been  built  with  insufficient  working 
capital  or  with  none  at  all.  .  .  .  The  commission  houses,  many  of 
which  have  banking  connections,  gladly  advance  75  to  90  per  cent 
of  the  market  value_  of  unsold  goods,  charging  the  mill  double  the 
rate  of  interest  which  they  themselves  must  pay  for  the  money. 
Thus  interest  charges  often  eat  up  profits"  (Thompson,  pp.  89-90). 
Mr.  Law  referred  to  commercial  paper  placed  with  banks,  and  not 
to  more  entangling  alliances,  when  he  declared  latterly  that  a  cotton 
mill  is  properly  a  seasonal  borrower  for  the  purchase  of  raw  mate- 
rial (John  A.  Law,  Cotton  Mill  Credits,  in  proceed.  Robt.  Morris 
Club,  National  Association  of  Credit  Men,  1916,  pp.  24-25). 


250  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH         [356 

with  ready  money.  "  A  mill  could  issue  $500,000  in  bonds 
at  6  per  cent,  carrying  this  $30,000  interest  and  pay  a  man 
in  New  York  $15,000  to  sell  its  product.  For  borrowing 
the  same  sum  from  the  commission  house,  the  mill  must 
pay  $50,000,  and  for  this  privilege  must  give,  besides,  a 
terrific  bonus  of  4  per  cent  on  sales.  The  difficulty  could 
have  been  avoided  had  the  mills  been  capitalized  at  enough 
in  the  beginning."61 

With  the  exception  of  the  labor  factor,  scarcely  any  rela- 
tions of  the  mills  have  been  so  continuous  and  uniform 
through  the  history  of  the  industry  as  those  with  commis- 
sion houses  selling  the  product.  It  has  been  explained  how, 
through  taking  stock  and  lending  working  capital,  these 
firms  became  a  characteristic  part  of  the  enterprise.  It  is 
very  difficult  to  generalize  as  to  whether  their  influence  has 

61  Tracy  I.  Hickman,  int.,  Augusta.  "  Mills  with  no  working  capi- 
tal began  life  with  their  credit  strained;  so  they  were  in  the  grip  of 
commission_fjims  which  lent  them  money"  (W.  W.  Ball,  int.,  Co- 
lumbia, Jan.  3,  1917).  Lack  of  capital  sometimes  entailed  equipment  \ 
with  second-hand  machinery.  This  was  probably  the  cause  with 
Montgomery's  first  mill  at  Spartanburg,  built  by  instalment  pay- 
ments (L.  G.  Potter,  int.,  Gaffney,  S.  C,  Sept.  13,  1916).  Later,  a 
mill  at  Bessemer  City,  N.  C,  installed  old  machinery  and  put  a  mort- 
gage upon  it  (G.  W.  Ragan,  int.,  Gastonia).  For  a  typical  advertise-  1 
ment  of  old  machinery  for  sale  by  a  New  England  mill,  cf.  News/ 
and  Courier,  Charleston,  April  19,  1881.  The  establishment  of  Pied- 
mont fell  in  hard  times ;  for  three  months  while  the  machinery  was 
being  installed,  the  only  pay  of  the  workmen  was  credit  for  groceries 
at  a  store  in  Greenville,  the  mill  giving  a  note  in  guarantee  (W.  J. 
Thackston,  int.,  Greenville).  A  commission  firm  was  of  great 
assistance.  Hammett  had  to  mortgage  some  of  his  private  property 
(James  D.  Hammett,  int.,  Anderson,  Sept.  11,  1916).  The  Charles- 
ton Manufacturing  Company  had  contemplated  setting  aside  $75,000 
of  the  $500,000  capital  for  preliminary  and  running  expenses,  but 
quicksand  was  struck  in  making  the  foundations  and  this  money  had 
to  be  spent  in  piling  (William  M.  Bird,  int.,  Charleston).  Lack  of 
running  capital  precluded  success.  Bonds  to  the  extent  of  $250,000 
were  issued  soon  after  operation  commenced  (A.  B.  Murray,  int., 
Charleston).  It  is  asserted  that  the  King  Mill,  at  Augusta,  is  the 
only  one  built  and  run  within  its  original  capital  stock;  a  fourth  of 
its  million-dollar  capitalization  was  reserved  for  running  expenses 
(Charles  Estes,  int.,  Augusta;  a  contemporary  newspaper  article  gives 
a  maximum  of  $181,979.57  for  this  purpose;  cf.  Evening  News,  Au- 
gusta, Jan.  23,  1884).  In  the  depression  in  1884  mills  without  surplus 
capital  were  seriously  embarrassed  (Chronicle,  Augusta,  Sept.  11, 
1884).  It  is  said  that  bad  management  was  responsible  for  fewer 
failures  than  insufficient  working  capital  (Tracy  I.  Hickman,  int., 
Augusta). 


3573  THE  ROLE  OF  CAPITAL  25  I 

been  good  or  bad.  It  is  best  to  understand  that,  for  a  good 
many  years  at  the  outset,  mills  could  not  have  come  into 
being  without  assistance  from  commission  men,  and  then, 
in  the  spirit  of  Tompkins'  position  that  well-disposed  houses 
have  been  advantageous  allies  but  that  many  abuses  need 
to  be  eliminated,  to  state  the  usual  complaints  and  defenses. 
It  was  early  felt  that  if  a  mill  was  to  secure  full  prices 
and  prompt  sales,  the  executive  officer  must  be  a  good  mer- 
chant, correcting  his  reliance  on  the  commission  firm  by 
personal  knowledge  of  markets.62  After  some  years  of  ex- 
perience, reasons  for  this  circumspection  could  be  enumer- 
ated. Pointing  out  that  selling  agents  found  subtler  means 
of  exploitation  than  the  commission  rate,  a  standard  5  per 
cent,  a  manufacturer  said  that  an  indictment  of  firms  guilty 
of  malpractice  would  include  the  following  counts:  (1) 
Beating  other  commission  men  to  the  market  was  preferred 
to  shuffling  in  the  competition  and  trying  to  make  a  sale  that 
would  in  the  end,  if  successful,  bring  a  higher  commission 
— so  they  would  offer  the  mill's  product  at  a  figure  below 
the  current  price.  (2)  Agents  would  sell  a  mill  out  further 
ahead  than  was  wise  from  the  manufacturer's  standpoint. 
(3)  Suppose  a  mill  has  been  holding  its  product  in  hope  of  a 
rise,  but  the  commission  house,  advising  that  no-  advance 
will  come  soon,  dumps  the  goods  on  the  market.  The 
market  falls  further.  Then,  to  prevent  product  from  piling 
up  in  stock,  the  agents  apply  to  sell  it.  It  has  been  sus- 
pected that  commission  firms  sometimes  in  such  cases  sold 
goods  to  themselves  for  purposes  of  speculation,  they  being 
in  a  position  to  know  that  the  market  would  recover  later. 
Here  they  reaped  their  percentage  on  bogus  sales  and  a 
profit  on  the  speculation.  Where  a  house  acts  as  exclusive 
agent  for  the  output  of  &■  factory,  guaranteeing  accounts, 

62  Cf.  comment  on  a  statement  of  Hammett's,  in  Manufacturers' 
Record,  Baltimore,  Feb.  1,  1883.  There  were  many  later  expressions; 
cf.  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  p.  128  ff.  Precau- 
tions were  to  be  taken  at  the  very  start;  in  deciding  on  the  goods  a 
new  mill  should  make,  it  should  be  remembered  that  the  commission 
firm  was  likely  to  advise  that  particular  product  in  which  it  special- 
ized, and  this  would  not  necessarily  be  profitable  in  the  long  run 
(ibid.,  p.  56 ff.). 


252  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH       £358 

it  is  best  considered  that  the  goods  are  sold  to  the  house  out- 
right, to  do  with  as  it  will.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  mill  man- 
agement under  such  an  arangement,  of  course,  to  keep  up 
with  the  market  and  insure  fair  play.  (4)  A  commission 
firm  might  tell  a  mill  its  product  was  bringing  less  than  was 
the  case,  the  firm  keeping  the  difference.  This  was  theft. 
(5)  Where  the  yarn  of  a  mill  was  made  of  cotton  superior 
to  that  used  by  its  competitors,  the  agents  would  not  al- 
ways take  pains  to  explain  this  and  so  get  a  better  price 
than  the  average ;  demand  for  yarn  of  that  count  might  be 
supplied  from  lower  grade  goods,  the  difference  in  commis- 
sions not  making  it  worth  while  to  push  the  finer  product. 
And  yet  the  commission  men  were  supposed  to  represent 
the  interests  of  their  clients.  (6)  A  firm  might  even  seek 
to  accomplish  the  buyer's  interest  exclusively.  Suppose  it 
did  not  handle  all  the  product  of  a  mill,  but  sometimes 
placed  it  in  specific  orders.  Seeing  a  chance  to  sell  goods, 
the  commission  house,  knowing  the  factories  of  the  district, 
would  shop  around  and  get  the  bottom  price  from  the  most 
necessitous  maker,  and  offer  this  to  its  client.63 

63  Sterling  Graydon,  int.,  Charlotte.  Several  of  these  and  addi- 
tional points  are  brought  out  by  Tompkins  (Cotton  Mill,  Commer- 
cial Features,  p.  128  ff.)  ;  agents  have  thrown  cancelled  orders  back 
upon  the  mills  without  much  scrutiny  into  claims  of  the  purchaser; 
on  the  other  hand,  they  have  been  too  accommodating  about  holding 
goods  and  advancing  money  on  these,  so  that  interest  account  ab- 
sorbed the  mill's  assets.  It  has  been  a  custom  for  commission  firms 
not  to  reveal  to  mill  managements  names  of  customers.  Out  of  this 
has  grown  much  suspicion  and  perhaps  some  misdealing.  Said  an 
official :  "  Some  years  ago  a  mill  in  which  I  was  a  stockholder  had  a 
lot  of  goods  piled  up  while  prices  were  at  rock  bottom.  The  com- 
mission house  wanted  to  sell  the  goods.  The  mill  begged  the  house 
not  to  sell;  we  were  confident  the  market  would  recover.  But  the 
firm  wrote  back  that  the  mill  owed  it  $200,000,  and  that  unless  this 
was  paid  the  stock  would  be  sold.  The  commission  house  knew  the 
mill  could  not  pay  the  amount  then,  and  the  goods  were  disposed 
of  at  a  great  loss.  I  have  always  thought  the  selling  agent  bought 
on  his  own  account."  In  another  instance  a  mill  received  through  a 
commission  firm  an  order  for  10,000  pounds  of  yarn  to  be  delivered 
each  month  for  ten  months.  The  mill  shipped  the  first  batch,  but 
when  time  came  to  deliver  the  second,  was  advised  by  the  house  that 
the  market  had  gone  off  some  points,  and  not  to  deliver.  Months 
passed  with  no  more  deliveries  until  the  tenth  month  arrived.  By 
now  the  price  was  above  that  named  in  the  contract,  and  the  mill 
was  instructed  to  ship  goods  covering  the  entire  order.    Expostula- 


359]  THE  ROLE  OF  CAPITAL  253 

Observing  that  a  mill  partly  owned  by  a  commission 
house  frequently  must  see  its  goods  sold  under  the  market 
and  that  factories  that  would  not  have  come  into  being  ex- 
cept for  assistance  of  selling  agents  were  built  as  feeders 
for  commission  firms  and  not  to  make  money  for  local 
stockholders,  a  progressive  manufacturer  advised  that  in- 
terference by  agents  be  eliminated  at  any  cost ;  on  the  whole, 
their  influence  in  the  Southern  textile  industry  has  been 
bad.64  Stock  in  mills  about  Greenville,  once  largely  held  at 
the  North,  is  coming  to  the  locality  of  the  factories ;  com- 
mission men  were  not  sorry  to  ruin  a  mill  if  they  could  be 
indemnified  in  charges  first.65 

The  story  is  not  one  entirely  of  condemnation.  Some 
commission  firms  have  had  close  and  thoroughly  helpful 
relations  with  Southern  mills,  lending  not  only  financial 
support  but  valuable  business  judgment.  Rates  of  commis- 
sion have  declined  one-third  since  the  eighties.66    Many  bad 

tion  was  unavailing,  the  commission  house  replying  that  the  customer 
would  be  lost  if  pressed  upon  the  fault,  and  that  unless  the  yarn  was 
delivered  the  house  would  sever  relations  with  the  mill.  The  director 
who  wished  to  sever  connections  was  bought  out.  It  was  his  con- 
viction that  the  selling  agent  was  his  own  touchy  customer.  This 
sort  of  experience  has  led  many  to  the  conclusion  that  the  only  way 
is  to  sell  to  the  house  direct,  demanding  payment  from  it  and  not 
knowing  or  caring  where  the  product  goes  (Charles  E.  Johnson,  int., 
Raleigh).  There  was  a  famous  case  in  South  Carolina  where  a  mill 
owing  a  commission  house  an  amount  equal  to  a  fourth  of  its  capi- 
talization and  feeling  itself  mistreated,  changed  agents,  borrowing 
from  the  new  firm  money  to  pay  the  old  debt.  But  the  offended 
agents  secured  enough  stock  to  control  the  mill,  and  finally  sapped 
it.  The  same  commission  house,  it  is  asserted,  tried  in  every  way 
to  show  that  colored  labor  was  unprofitable  in  a  mill  in  which  it  had 
been  installed  in  an  extremity.  Commission  men,  especially  where 
they  had  banking  interests,  found  it  profitable  to  borrow  money  in 
the  North  at  3  or  3^  per  cent  and  lend  it  to  Southern  mills  at  6  and 
7  per  cent.  This  caused  much  dissatisfaction,  particularly  when  the 
sums  going  to  the  agents  in  commission  were  considered  (Tompkins, 
ibid.;  William  M.  Bird,  int.,  .Charleston).  Commissions  have  in 
special  cases,  where  a  firm  was  eager  to  secure  agency  of  a  mill, 
been  as  low  as  2  or  3  per  cent  (F.  Q.  O'Neill,  int.,  Charleston. 
W.  W.  Ball,  int.,  Columbia,  Jan.  3,  1917). 

64  Joseph  H.  Separk,  int.,  Gastonia. 

65  Clement  F.  Haynsworth,  int.,  Greenville.  Lancashire  half  a 
century  after  the  South,  developed  the  same  devices  for  financing 
new  mills  as  have  here  been  described,  with  the  same  drawbacks 
attending.     Cf.  Copeland,  pp.  317-318. 

66  Summerfield  Baldwin,  Jr.,  int.,  Baltimore. 


2  54  THE    RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE    SOUTH         [360 

practices  have  disappeared.  It  is  probably  true  that  along 
with  regret  for  early  faults  must  go  the  recognition  that, 
whether  participation  of  commission  men  was  damaging  or 
beneficial,  it  was  necessary  and  that  the  industry  owes  its 
establishment  as  much  to  them  as  to  any  other  factor.67  It 
is  to  be  borne  in  mind,  too,  that  the  mills  were  started  by 
men  new  to  that  industry  and,  in  many  cases,  to  all  indus- 
try; these  might  be  too  quick  to  charge  exploitation  by 
powerful  agents  a  thousand  miles  away  in  the  North.  Also, 
selling  houses  had  the  money  motive,  not  the  patriotic  one 
present  with  local  projectors.68 

There  is  an  evident  movement  in  the  South  away  from 
any  reliance  upon  outside  commission  houses.  This  mani- 
fests itself  in  action  by  sales  through  brokers  or  directly  to 
jobbers  and  mills,  by  patronage  of  Southern  selling  agents, 
and  by  establishment  by  groups  of  mills  of  sales  offices  in 
the  North.  Moreover,  that  the  South  is  thinking  of  a  still 
better  solution  is  apparent  in  frequent  mention  of  the  pos- 
sibility of  building  up  a  distributing  point  within  the  sec- 

67  J.  A.  Chapman,  int.,  Spartanburg;  C.  S.  Morris,  int.,  Salisbury. 

68  As  early  as  1903  a  spirit  of  conciliation  toward  commission  men, 
of  letting  bygones  be  bygones,  was  shown  in  the  Southern  Cotton 
Spinners'  Association  (proceed.  7th  Annual  Convention,  p.  162).  It 
should  be  clear  to  the  reader  why  selling  houses,  in  contrast  to 
machinery  manufacturers,  retained  their  mill  shares.  Critics  at  the 
South  have  charged  this  degree  of  control  permitted  peremptory 
methods  in  disposal  of  product  that  proved  harmful;  on  the  other 
hand,  this  may  be  interpreted  as  a  proper  watchfulness  over  enter- 
prises being  credited  with  large  sums  at  a  time  when  money  could 
not  be  gotten  by  them  otherwise  (cf.  Copeland,  p.  197).  "This 
Southern  development  would  have  been  delayed  twenty  years  if  the 
commission  men  had  not  taken  hold.  Southern  promoters  absolutely 
did  not  have  enough  money  at  home  to  accomplish  it.  Besides,  it 
was  credit  extended  to  projectors  of  mills  by  selling  houses  that 
gave  them  a  measure  of  credit  with  machinery  people."  Commission 
firms  have  had  to  keep  large  capitals  ready  against  calls  of  their 
Southern  clients;  over  advances  have  usually  been  made  just  on 
the  credit  of  the  mill  (Summerfield  Baldwin,  Sr.,  int.,  Baltimore). 
Frequently  money  was  lent  to  mills  at  less  than  local  rates,  even  had 
banks  been  willing  to  furnish  funds  (Washington  Clark,  int.,  Co- 
lumbia. Cf.,  as  to  slightness  of  available  banking  facilities,  Ham- 
mond, pp.  160-161).  Commission  percentages  were  not  so  high 
where  mills  were  not  heavy  borrowers  (J.  A.  Chapman,  int.,  Spartan- 
burg). The  fact  that  selling  houses  placed  little  real  money  at  dis- 
posal of  the  mills,  except  in  advance  on  goods,  does  not  modify  the 
importance  of  their  assistance. 


36l]  THE   ROLE   OF    CAPITAL  255 

tion  that  will  make  dependence  upon  Philadelphia  and  New 
York  no  longer  necessary.  It  is  generally  recognized  that 
this  last  cannot  be  accomplished  until  finishing  plants  have 
become  numerous  in  the  South,  until  financial  support  of 
outside  selling  firms  is  not  required,  and  until  diversity  of 
prices  for  identical  product,  largely  resulting  from  par- 
ticipation of  commission  firms,  disappears.  The  Panama 
Canal,  development  of  banking  resources,  competition  itself 
through  extension  of  the  industry,  and,  all  in  all,  total 
maturing  of  Southern  economic  life,  will  hasten  realization 
of  this  ideal.69  There  are  enough  who  believe  that  the 
strong  tradition,  mainly  in  favor  of  New  York,  cannot  be 
broken  down,  and  that  other  obstacles  preclude  complete 
conduct  of  the  industry,  in  manufacture  and  commerce, 
within  the  South.  But  others  accept  and  challenge  these 
difficulties  in  much  the  same  spirit  that  characterized  the 
founders  of  mills  forty  years  ago.  These  cannot  see  the 
logic  of  sending  goods  to  the  North  to  be  bleached  and 
finished  when  the  South  has  every  facility  for  these  proc- 
esses if  only  they  are  taken  advantage  of ;  if  it  was  once 
raw  cotton  that  was  to  be  manufactured  near  the  source,  it 
is  now  goods  in  the  grey  that  are  not  to  be  wastefully 
shipped  away  and  shipped  back. 

Before  the  Southern  industry  as  such  took  its  rise,  before 
Northern  selling  firms  came  into  the  field,  the  majority  of 
mills  relied  mainly  upon  local,  or  certainly  Southern,  de- 
mand for  their  product.  Exchange  of  yarn  for  butter  and 
beeswax  by  the  smallest  factories  was  matched  in  some- 
what more  extended  barter  of  larger  mills.  Such  practices 
survived  the  war,  and  were  occasionally  present  even  after 
a  commission  house  took  charge  of  part  of  the  output  of  a 
plant.70  Even  in  the  eighties  some  mills  had  traveling  sales- 
men covering  the  South,  and  others  were  terminating  brief 
connections  with  commission  houses  and  selling  direct  or 

69  George  W.  Williams,  Charleston ;  Thomas  Purse,  Savannah,  Ga., 
Dec.  26,  1916,  interviews. 

70  Cf.  Thompson,  p.  51;  Daily  Dispatch,  Richmond,  Jan.  2,  1880; 
William  Banks,  Columbia,  and  W.  J.  Thackston,  Greenville,  gave 
instances  in  interviews. 


256  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH       £362 

through  brokers  (the  latter  giving  the  mill  right  of  accept- 
ance or  rejection  of  orders,  costing  far  less  and  involving 
risk  that  was  small  beside  commission  charges)  ;  but  for 
the  most  part  this  was  the  day  of  leaning  upon  selling 
agents.71  From  this  dependence  the  South  is  emerging 
and  returning  to  the  old  self-reliance,  but  a  self-sufficiency 
accompanied  by  improved  facilities  and  wider  outlook. 
Distributing  companies  formed  by  chains  of  Southern  mills, 
especially  where  under  united  ownership,  are  becoming  fac- 
tors in  Northern  markets;  with  more  commercial  knowl- 
edge direct  selling  by  individual  mills  loses  its  dangers.72 
True,  international  representation  has  not  yet  come,  but 
this  may  lie  just  over  the  horizon.73 

It  has  been  said  that  merchants  were  often  mill  builders. 
These  sometimes  got  outside  capital  from  other  sources 
than  machinery  and  commission  men,  namely,  from  those 
with  whom  they  had  commercial  dealings,  but  even  in  this 
instance  there  were  special  reasons  prompting  investment. 
Concord  presents  typical  cases.  The  largest  manufacturer 
of  the  place  went  to  the  town  as  clerk  in  a  general  store 
and  later  went  in  business  for  himself.  He  determined  to 
build  a  factory,  securing  some  $60,000  in  local  subscrip- 
tions.    Then  he  went  to  the  firms  from  which  he  bought 

71  Copeland,  p.  216;  Charles  Estes,  Augusta;  W.  R.  Odell,  Con- 
cord, interviews. 

72  Copeland,  pp.  172,  209;  C.  B.  Armstrong,  int.,  Gastonia;  for  ref- 
erences to  new  selling  methods,  see  Charlotte  News,  Textile  Ed., 
1917. 

73  Cf.  Law,  in  proceed.  Morris  Club,  National  Assn.  Credit  Men, 
1916,  p.  23 ;  Tompkins,  The  South's  Position  in  American  Affairs,  p. 
5  ff .  An  interesting  approach  to  later  developments  was  the  forma- 
tion of  the  Cone  Export  and  Commission  Co.,  sometimes  known  as 
the  "  Plaid  Trust,"  in  1891.  The  firm  sought  to  represent  all  the 
Southern  plaid  mills,  these  buying  stock  and  securing  a  measure  of 
control  in  the  enterprise.  It  came  too  early  to  succeed,  unity  proving 
impossible;  it  can  hardly  be  called  an  effort  by  a  commission  house 
to  anticipate  autonomous  action  on  the  part  of  the  factories.  (In- 
formation as  to  this  project  is  contained  in  an  announcement  by  the 
Company  issued  in  May,  1891,  giving  quotations  from  the  Daily 
Commercial  Bulletin,  N.  Y.,  May  14,  and  Dry  Goods  Chronicle,  May 
23,  1891 ;  cf.  Copeland,  p.  206,  and  as  to  a  somewhat  similar  organi- 
zation, p.  161  ff.;  Mrs.  Moses  Cone,  Baltimore,  Md.,  Nov.  14,  1916; 
Bernard  . Cone,  Greensboro;  R.  G.  Vaughn,  Greensboro,  Aug.  30, 
1916,  interviews.) 


363]  THE  ROLE  OF  CAPITAL  257 

"brogans,"  and  cloth  and  to  which  he  shipped  raw  cotton, 
explaining  to  them  his  plans  and  showing  that  a  mill  would 
enable  the  town  to  grow  and  permit  him  to  do  a  larger  mer- 
chandise business  with  these  wholesalers.  It  was  almost 
worth  the  subscription  to  keep  his  business,  so  each  firm 
bought  $5000  of  stock.74  The  only  shares  of  another  Con- 
cord company  owned  outside  of  North  Carolina  are  held  by 
Baltimore  men  who  had  business  relations  with  the  mer- 
chant who  built  the  mill.75  Sometimes  mercantile  connec- 
tions of  many  years  before  were  recalled  to  serve  a  purpose 
in  the  eighties.76 

Much  of  the  early  mill  building  consisted  of  extension  of 
plant  by  means  of  earnings.  Tompkins  indicated  that  profits 
to  the  amount  of  5  per  cent  of  capital  were  ordinarily  de- 
voted to  this  extension,  but  in  frequent  individual  cases 
much  more  than  this  was  found  available.77  Often  by  the 
time  a  mill  was  put  in  operation  a  company  had  exhausted 
credit  facilities  and  local  capital  resources;  the  large  earn- 
ings brought  a  new  increment  of  cash  and  additional  com- 
mand over  credit,  which  were  employed  in  augmentation  of 
plant.78  Vaucluse  was  built  from  the  profits  of  Graniteville 
and  a  third  plant,  the  Hickman,  was  created  with  money 
borrowed.79 

While  many  mills  with  extended  plant  have  little  more 

74  J.  L.  Hartsell,  int.,  Concord.  Years  later,  when  merchandising 
is  no  longer  thought  of,  this  manufacturer  can  readily  get  subscrip- 
tions, it  is  said,  from  retired  wholesale  dealers  of  New  York,  Phila- 
delphia and  Boston  (Charles  McDonald,  int.,  Charlotte). 

75  Ibid. 

76  Charles  Estes,  int.,  Augusta. 

77  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  p.  172.  Besides,  he  confused 
new  construction  with  upkeep. 

78  Benjamin  Gossett,  int.,  Anderson.  There  might  be  combination 
of  methods.  The  5000-spindle  Williamston  Mill  issued  extra  stock 
to  $300,000,  increasing  spindleage  to  15,000;  afterwards  the  plant 
grew  to  have  32,000  spindles,  all  on  earnings  and  credit. 

79  Tracy  I.  Hickman,  int.,  Augusta.  Cf.  Blackman,  p.  5.  The 
Gaffney  mill  erected  a  two-story  addition  from  the  first  three  years' 
earnings  (L.  Baker,  int.,  Gaffney).  The  Arlington  Mill,  Gastonia, 
organized  with  $130,000  capital  and  3000  spindles,  after  three  years 
issued  a  stock  dividend  of  $45,000  and  increased  its  spindles  to  9500, 
and  by  later  earnings  enlarged  to ,  12,000.  Cf .  Charlotte  News,  Tex- 
tile Ed.,  1917,  as  to  Cliffside  and  McAden  mills. 


258  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH       ^64 

than  their  original  capitalization,  that  of  others'  has  been 
increased1  by  additional  issues  of  stock,  frequently  to  sub- 
scribers at  a  reduction.  Though  thus  put  out  at  75  or  80, 
the  industry  was  profitable  enough  to  keep  shares  at  the 
par  of  ioo.80  "The  stockholders  of  the  Matthews  Cotton 
Factory,  at  Selman,"  it  was  reported,  "have  resolved  to  in- 
crease the  capital  stock  from  $100,000  to  $300,000.  Ex- 
tensive plans  for  enlargement  have  been  determined  on,  and 
they  will  be  commensurate  with  the  amount  of  increased 
stock  taken."81  The  Anderson  mill,  capitalization  of  which 
was  raised  from  $100,000  to  $250,000  and  by  three  more 
increases  to  $800,000,  had  a  debt  on  the  plant  in  the  begin- 
ning; earnings  going  to  take  care  of  this,  and  further  credit 
probably  being  difficult,  stock  issues  were  resorted  to  for 
enlargements.  Machinery  and  commission  men  participated 
heavily.82  Local  brokers  negotiated  for  the  entire  addi- 
tional stock  of  the  Enterprise  Factory,  Augusta;  it  was  un- 
derstood that  one  man  and  his  friends  would  take  $140,000 
of  the  $350,000  issue.83 

It  was  characteristic  of  the  establishing  of  an  industry 
among  people  not  very  familiar  with  financial  devices,  with 
few  investors  beside  those  interested  in  cotton  rnanufactur- 

80  Increasing  capital  to  $1,000,000,  stock  of  the  Sibley  mill  was 
offered  to  original  subscribers  in  pro  rata  amounts,  any  not  so  taken 
to  be  sold  in  the  general  market  at  not  less  than  par.  The  directors 
were  empowered,  too,  to  issue  $100,000  in  bonds  (circular  letter  of 
William  C.  Sibley,  Augusta,  April  26,  1882,  in  Raworth  scrapbook). 
It  is  said  now  that  $500,000  in  stock  should  have  been  issued  to  build 
the  Hickman  mill,  rather  than  borrowing  for  this  purpose  (Tracy  I. 
Hickman,  int.,  Augusta). 

81  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Dec.  21,  1882.  At  reorgani- 
zation of  the  Charleston  Manufacturing  Co.,  $300,000  fresh  capital 
was  subscribed  and  equipment  of  the  plant  was  completed  (A.  B. 
Murray,  int.,  Charleston). 

82  J.  A.  Brock,  int.,  Anderson.  Most  of  the  original  shareholders 
increased  their  subscriptions  to  the  Cannon  Mill  before  the  plant 
was  completed  (J.  L.  Hartsell,  int.,  Concord).  Enlargement  of 
capital  and  plant  often  was  undertaken  in  this  early  stage.  In  a 
period  of  similar  activity  thirty-five  years  later,  companies  at  Gas- 
tonia  had  hardly  received  their  charters  before  deciding  to  increase 
capitalization.  Clifton  and  Trough  Shoals  mills  intended  to  double 
capacity  and  capital  when  a  successful  beginning  had  been  made 
(Blackman,  pp.  10-11;  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb.  10, 1882). 

83  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb.  24,  1881. 


365]  THE  ROLE  OF  CAPITAL  259 

ing  as  such,  and  with  commission  houses  and  machinery 
makers  to  assist,  that  bonds  and  preferred  stock  should 
have  been  employed  rarely.  "  The  people  just  put  in  their 
money  and  made  it  go  as  far  as  it  would,  without  thought 
of  preferred  stock  and  bonds.  Mills  were  generally  small 
because  the  money  did  not  go  far."84  Also,  if  fixed  assets 
in  land,  buildings  and  machinery  were  mortgaged  by  is- 
suance of  bonds,  there  was  only  material  in  course  of  'manu- 
facture and  finished  product  on  which  to  base  commercial 
credit.  It  is  said  that  in  most  instances  where  bonds  were 
sold,  the  practice  was  found  to  be  bad.85  No  case  has  been 
discovered  where  preferred  stock  or  bonds  were  issued  at 
the  outset ;  it  was  when  a  mill  got  into  trouble,  needed  addi- 
tional capital  or  had  to  be  reorganized  that  such  helps  were 
turned  to.86  A  mill  at  Bessemer  City  was  under-capitalized, 
the  projector  could  not  persuade  stockholders  to  increase 
their  subscriptions,  and  so  machinery  could  not  be  installed. 
The  promoter  built  a  second  mill  and  a  third  which  were 

84  T.  C.  Leak,  int.,  Rockingham. 

85  W.  J.  Thackston,  letter,  Greenville,  S.  C,  Nov.  25,  1916. 

86  Tracy  I.  Hickman,  Augusta ;  F.  Q.  O'Neill,  Charleston,  inter- 
views. Cf.  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  igoo,  "  Cotton  Manufac- 
tures," p.  31.  The  following  from  the  report  of  the  president  of  the 
Enterprise  factory  to  the  stockholders  in  1885  is  sufficiently  revealing 
to  bear  quotation :  "  Four  months  ago,  when  the  Board  of  Directors 
took  charge  of  your  property,  they  found  it  burdened  with  a  floating 
debt  of  $200,550.25,  largely  the  result  of  embezzlement  on  the  part 
of  its  former  President.  .  .  .  The  company  had  also  issued  second 
mortgage  bonds  on  property,  to  the  amount  of  $150,000.00,  with 
which  to  pay  off  such  debts  as  were  most  urgent,  but,  not  finding  a 
ready  sale  for  these  bonds  in  their  then  crippled  condition,  the  Presi- 
dent had  hypothecated  them  to  the  extent  of  their  issue,  as  collateral 
to  secure  creditors.  ...  It  was  determined  to  issue  preferred  stock 
to  the  amount  of  $250,000.00,  and  with  the  proceeds  pay  off  the 
debts  of  the  company,  take  up  the  second  mortgage  bonds,  and 
operate  the  mill.  Since  then  there  has  been  $148,200.00  subscribed 
to  the  preferred  stock,  of  which  $85,750.00  has  been  collected.  We 
have  already  taken  up  and  destroyed  $100,000.00  of  the  second  mort- 
gage bonds,  and  paid  $95,121.34  of  the  outstanding  indebtedness. 
There  remains  $101,800.00  of  the  preferred  stock  not  yet  taken,  but 
your  Board  believe,  that  in  the  improved  condition  of  the  company, 
it  will  not  be  necessary  to  dispose  of  more  than  one-half  of  it"  to 
care  for  all  indebtedness  except  $42,000  to  machinery  makers,  to  be 
paid  by  company's  notes  running  for  ten  years.  It  was  hoped  soon 
to  redeem  the  preferred  stock  (Raworth  Scrapbook).  Cf.  Augusta 
Trade  Review,  Oct.,  1884,  as  to  Augusta  Factory. 


260  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [[366 

bonded.  Neither  venture  succeeded.87  Earnings  having 
been  slight  because  of  a  bad  market  for  goods,  it  was  de- 
cided in  1884  to  cut  down  the  proportion  of  overhead  ex- 
pense of  the  Sibley  mill  by  completing  the  equipment  of  the 
plant;  this  was  thought  advantageous,  too,  because  makers 
were  not  busy  and  machinery  could  be  purchased  cheaply. 
Not  all  of  the  previously  authorized  bonds  had  been  sold; 
the  directors  recommended  an  additional  issue  and  urged 
that  shareholders  follow  the  example  of  the  directors  in 
subscribing  as  heavily  as  possible.  This  course  would  pre- 
serve the  ownership  of  the  property,  make  6  per  cent  earn- 
ings possible  and  arrest  the  decline  in  value  of  stock.88 

In  some  instances,  as  in  Columbia  and  Charleston,  local 
banks  were  of  substantial  assistance  in  furnishing  working 

87  S.  N.  Boyce  and  J.  Lee  Robinson,  int.,  Gastonia. 

88  See  annual  report  of  President  Sibley  in  Chronicle  and  Con- 
stitutionalist, Augusta,  May  1, 1884.  In  two  weeks  nearly  two-thirds 
of  the  bonds  had  been  placed  and  the  president,  "  notwithstanding 
the  disappointments  of  the  past,"  had  "more  faith  now  than  he  ever 
had  in  the  final  success  of  the  company"  (ibid.,  May  14,  1884). 
Striking  difficulties  with  commencement  of  operation,  the  Charleston 
mill  issued  bonds  to  half  the  value  of  its  property  (A.  B.  Murray, 
int.,  Charleston).  Later,  an  instructive  operation  took  place  be- 
tween an  involved  South  Carolina  mill  and  its  commission  house. 
The  plant  cost  $21  per  spindle — $1,748,000 — but  there  was  a  debt  of 
$9.64  to  the  spindle,  the  company  being  capitalized  at  $976,700,  all 
common  stock.  The  net  indebtedness  had  run  as  high  as  $830,000, 
but  at  the  time  of  this  episode  it  stood  at  $510,000.  Trouble  of  a 
serious  nature  being  discovered  in  the  books,  the  mill  would  have 
gone  into  the  hands  of  receivers  unless  relief  had  come.  The  com- 
mission house  was  so  heavily  interested  that  it  had  to  act,  and  took 
$500,000  of  preferred  stock  at  par,  though  a  banking  house  would 
not  have  given  above  80.  Other  creditors  insisted  upon  payment  of 
their  accounts,  and  the  selling  firm  had  to  put  up  $560,000  to  care 
for  these  items,  making  its  total  interest  in  the  company  well  over 
a  million  dollars.  Though  the  original  debt  of  mill  to  commission 
house  had  been  liquidated  through  conversion  into  preferred  stock, 
by  the  whole  operation  this  obligation  was  greater  than  before,  and 
there  was  an  increase  in  stock  from  $980,000  to  $1,500,000.  Condi- 
tions speedily  improved  from  this  date.  In  a  case  such  as  this  the 
preferred  stock  would  ordinarily  be  offered  to  the  shareholders  who, 
however,  were  not  usually  able  to  take  it.  Though  there  are  state- 
ments to  the  contrary,  one  of  wide  observation  did  not  know  of  an 
instance  where  a  commission  house  bought  into  a  healthy  mill  to  gain 
control  of  it.  Probably  a  similar  happening  was  the  taking  of  all  the 
bonds  of  a  mill  by  a  firm  of  selling  agents  thirty  years  ago  (A.  A. 
Thompson,  int.,  Raleigh).  Cf.  Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  1916, 
as  to  Lydia  mills. 


367]  THE  ROLE  OF  CAPITAL  26 1 

funds,  but  such  assistance  was  far  from  general.  Reasons 
for  this  have  been  noticed.  Banks  were  few  and  had 
slender  resources.89  Industry  and  banking,  developing  to- 
gether, were  mutually  helpful,  but  neither  could  greatly 
take  the  initiative.  Interest  rates  were  high.  Even  latterly, 
mills  borrowed  at  7  and  8  per  cent,  and  besides  were  com- 
pelled to  keep  a  balance  of  20  per  cent  of  the  loans,  on  de- 
posit without  interest.  On  the  other  hand,  commission 
firms  might  lend  at  less  than  these  rates  and  require  no 
balance.  Northern  mills  could  get  money  from  banks  at 
half  the  interest  paid  in  the  South.90  Southern  banks  as- 
sisted the  mills  indirectly  to  some  extent  by  loans  to  stock- 
holders on  their  shares.91 

As  early  as  1884  it  was  suggested  in  the  South  that  those 
contemplating  the  founding  of  mills  should  consider  the 
plan  of  securing  subscriptions  from  operatives,  papular  in 
England.02  In  the  nature  of  things,  the  scheme  could  not 
have  been  employed  in  that  stage  of  the  development.  Prob- 
ably it  was  not  relied  upon  to  any  extent  until,  recently, 
half  the  stock  in  a  Gastonia  mill  was  taken  by  operatives.93 

Leaving  now  the  means  of  acquiring  capital,  the  subject 
of  profits  and  dividends  is  to  be  examined.  In  1890  it  was 
estimated  that  for  the  country  at  large  profits  in  cotton 

89  Immediately  after  the  war,  the  largest  bank  in  Charlotte  had  a 
capital  of  only  $20,000  (Hudson  Millar,  int.,  Charlotte).  The  rate 
of  growth  of  Southern  banking  is  eloquent  of  former  leanness  (cf. 
John  Skelton  Williams,  The  Billion  Arrives,  p.  7). 

90  Summerfield  Baldwin,  Jr.,  Baltimore;  Benjamin  Gossett,  Ander- 
son ;  interviews ;  S.  S.  Broadus,  Decatur,  letter.  Generally,  condi- 
tions have  improved.  A  good  mill  can  sell  paper  through  brokers  at 
4  per  cent  and  commission.  (Summerfield  Baldwin,  ibid.;  C.  B. 
Armstrong,  int.,  Gastonia).  Richmond  banks  have  come  to  bear 
important  part  in  the  Southern  industry.  One  group  of  mills  at 
some  seasons  has  owed  Richmond  as  much  as  $4,000,000. 

91  August  Kohn,  int.,  Columbia.  Barely  worthy  of  mention  is  the 
fact  that  mills  sometimes,  with  more  or  less  surrender  of  strictly 
local  control,  got  assistance  from  established  manufacturers  in  the 
South.  Or  a  factory  might  merge  entirely  with  a  group  of  mills 
skilfully  managed. 

92  An  Augusta  paper  of  Nov.  6,  referring  to  earlier  publication  in 
New  Orleans  Times-Democrat,  in  Raworth  Scrapbook. 

93  Charlotte  News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917.  In  limited  adoption,  the 
plan  has  frequently  been  used  as  an  employer's  device.  Cf.  ibid.,  as 
to  Saxony  Spinning  Mill,  Lincolnton. 


262  THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [368 

manufactures,  allowing  only  for  ordinary  repairs,  were 
7.59  per  cent,  or,  deducting  3  per  cent  of  the  value  of  plant 
to  care  for  depreciation,  5.83  per  cent.94  The  estimated 
average  rate  of  dividends  paid  by  New  England  mills  from 
1889  to  1908  was  y.y  per  cent.95  Such  calculations  are  not 
fairly  comparable,  and  yet  'some  statements  as  to  earnings 
of  Southern  factories  will  help  to  give  a  notion  of  the  rela- 
tive position  of  the  industry  in  that  section.  Experience  in 
the  Carolinas  showed  that  mills  on  all  classes  of  goods  made 
there  could  have  a  profit  of  from  10  to  30  per  cent.96  The 
same  competent  observer  thought  that  the  average  annual 
net  profit  of  the  best  mills  for  the  first  twenty  years  of  the 
period  was  15  per  cent.97  But  assertions  vary  widely,  even 
considering  differences  in  periods  embraced.  One  with 
knowledge  of  the  industry  believed  average  profits  from 
1880  to  1914  were  not  as  high  as  10  per  cent,98  while  a 
writer  on  the  subject  said  that  South  Carolina  investors 
would  have  been  better  off  financially  had  they  put  their 
money  in  real  estate  mortgages  at  7  per  cent.99 

Besides  the  confusion  between  profits  and  dividends, 
statements  as  to  earnings  are  difficult  of  comparison  be- 
cause uniformity  of  calculation  was  lacking.  A  common 
error  was  to  quote  dividends  paid  on  capitalization  rather 
than  earnings  on  total  investment.  Plant  cost  of  some 
milb  was  as  much  as  four  times  their  capital.  Dividends 
might  be  paid  on  shares,  neglecting  large  liabilities  of  stock- 
holders ;  sometimes,  also,  gains  seemed  great  because  stated 
in  terms  of  paid  up  capital  only.100    Even  late  in  the  period 

94  U.  S.  Census  of  Manufactures,  Cotton  Manufacture,  p.  167. 

95  Copeland,  p.  263. 

96  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  p.  51.  That  this 
was  true  for  the  smallest  as  well  as  the  largest  plants  is  verified  by 
the  case  of  the  1000-spindle  Fingerville  Factory  (cf.  Blackman,  p.  11). 

97  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  p.  172;  cf.  Thomp- 
son, p.  88. 

98  John  W.  Fries,  int.,  Winston-Salem. 

99  August  Kohn,  int.,  Columbia. 

100  Thirty-five  years  after  the  mills  around  Greenville  were 
founded,  plants  costing  $21.08  per  spindle  were  capitalized  at  $12.72 
per  spindle.  Dividends  on  actual  plant  cost  have  not  been  over  12 
per  cent   (W.  J.  Thackston,  int.,  Greenville;  cf.  Goldsmith,  p.  6). 


369]  THE  ROLE  OF  CAPITAL  263 

there  was  occasion  for  the  advice  of  a  trained  manufac- 
turer that  all  profits  not  required  for  dividends  be  not 
passed  to  surplus  without  providing  for  depreciation,  work- 
ing capital,  and  reserve  for  paying  plant  debt.101  A  friend 
of  the  Southern  industry  right  at  the  outset  sought  to  dis- 
credit the  overstatement  of  promoters  of  the  Clement  At- 
tachment that  28%  per  cent  could  be  made  on  a  capital  of 
$6000,  showing  that  they  had  included  no  charges  for  super- 
intendence, commission  and  freight,  insurance,  taxes  and 
wear  and  tear,  and  allowed  too  little  for  incidental  ex- 
penses.102 

Mills  in  the  beginning,  from  reasons  that  have  been 
noted — general  prosperity  of  the  time,  newness  of  equip- 
ment, nearness  to  raw  cotton,  cheapness  of  power  and  labor, 
length  of  working  hours,  unexploited  home  market — were 
extraordinarily  profitable.  "A  cotton  factory  which  is  not 
making  money  now  had  better  close  up  at  once,"  it  was  said 
in  1880.103  Two  years  later  it  was  recited  that  the  Augusta 
Factory  in  the  previous  seventeen  years  had  paid  an  aver- 
age of  1^/2  per  cent  dividends  besides  laying  aside  a  sur- 
plus of  $350,000;  Langley  for  several  years  had  been  pay- 

"  In  the  old  days  it  took  four  or  five  years  to  pay  for  the  plant  if 
they  did  not  make  the  mistake  of  trying  to  pay  normal  dividends 
instead  of  liquidating  this  debt"  (Benjamin  Gossett,  int.,  Anderson). 
It  has  even  been  said  that  all  mills  were  undercapitalized  and  started 
out  in  debt  (Marshall  Orr,  Anderson;  A.  N.  Wood,  Gaffney,  inter- 
views). Machinery  makers  and  commission  firms,  anxious  to  in- 
crease their  business,  were  severely  blamed  for  inducing  too  great 
extension  without  sufficient  capitalization,  but  this  writer  found  the 
conditions  bettering  latterly  (Law,  pp.  19-20). 

101  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  pp.  83-84.  He 
was  appreciative,  however,  of  the  wisdom  of  a  surplus  to  guarantee 
equality  of  dividends.  It  will  be  noticed  later  that  failure  to  allow 
for  depreciation  was  all  too  common;  cf.  ibid.,  pp.  82,  172;  Thomp- 
son, pp.  88,  67-68. 

102  Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  Feb.  20,  1880.  For  a  few  of  many 
instances  illustrating  neglect  to  offset  depreciation,  see  Blackman, 
pp.  7,  10,  13.  "  In  no  case  have  we  heard  of  any  mill  declaring  less 
than  10  per  cent  annual  dividends,  and  in  every  case  in  which  only 
this  per  cent  was  declared  a  large  amount  was  taken  from  the  earn- 
ings and  used  for  repairs,  additions  to  machinery  and  increasing  the 
.  .  .  capacity  of  the  mills"  (Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and 
Manufacturers'  Record,  June  3,  1882).  Here,  evidently,  upkeep  and 
extension  were  looked  to  rather  than  depreciation. 

103  Blackman,  p.  12.    This  was  probably  Hammett. 


264  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE    SOUTH        \_Z70 

ing  from  15  to  20  per  cent  and  had  an  accumulated  surplus 
of  $200,000.  The  Wesson  mills  in  Mississippi  had  just 
paid  a  dividend  of  26  per  cent,  the  Troup  factory  in  the 
same  State  had  paid  24  per  cent,  and  a  mill  in  Tennessee 
had  touched  50  per  cent.  Such  facts  were  often  cited  to 
show  that  the  Southern  industry,  though  young  and  ham- 
pered by  untrained  management  and  operatives  and  lack  of 
capital,  was  more  prosperous  than  that  of  the  North.  A 
New  England  estimate  was  quoted  to  the  effect  that  fifty 
leading  establishments  of  that  section  in  the  previous  five 
years  had  paid  average  annual  dividends  of  less  than  7  per 
cent.104 

The  profitableness  of  Graniteville  was  often  pointed  to; 
there  came  to  be  almost  a  Graniteville  legend  in  this  re- 
gard. Dividends  under  Gregg  amounted,  in  various  state- 
ments, anywhere  from  7  to  12^4  per  cent.  The  mill  was 
in  bad  condition  when  Hickman  became  president  in  1867, 
being  in  debt  and  paying  12  per  cent  interest.    There  is  no 

104  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
June  3,  1882.  For  minor  variations  of  these  statements,  cf.  ibid., 
Sept.  2,  1882.  There  was  believed  to  be  room  for  indefinite  expan- 
sion of  cotton  manufacture  in  South  Carolina,  "  inasmuch  as  the 
Carolina  mills  pay  expenses  when  the  New  England  mills  run  at  a 
loss,  make  money  when  the  New  England  mills  only  pay  expenses 
and  make  still  larger  profits  than  the  New  England  mill's  when  these 
pay  well  (Blackman,  p.  19;  cf.  ibid.,  statement  of  Twitchell,  p. 
11).  Cf.  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers' 
Record,  Nov.  4,  1882,  quotation  from  Bradstreet's  and  Manufac- 
turers' Record,  Baltimore,  Feb.  1,  1883,  statement  of  Hammett.  The 
Boston  Commercial  Bulletin  said :  "  The  advantages  of  cotton  manu- 
facture are  with  the  South  decidedly,  the  profits  of  the  business  there 
having  shown  an  average  dividend  of  15Y2  per  cent  against  7%  per 
cent  in  the  North  during  the  year  1882"  (ibid.,  April  5,  1883).  Re- 
viewing the  generally  unsatisfactory  condition  of  Northern  mills 
from  1890  to  1900,  attributed  in  large  part  to  successful  competition 
of  Southern  enterprises,  it  was  declared :  "  Prior  to  the  close  of  the 
census  year  there  had  been  scarcely  any  interruption  of  the  exceed- 
ing prosperity  of  Southern  spinners.  They  did  not  curtail  produc- 
tion when  many  Northern  manufacturers  were  in  a  state  bordering 
upon  despair;  on  the  contrary,  a  large  number  of  their  mills  were 
running  day  and  night.  They  did  not  seek  to  dispose  of  their 
product  by  auction,  but  sold  all  they  could  make  at  prices  which 
gave  their  stockholders  handsome  dividends "  (U.  S.  Census  of 
Manufactures,  1900,  Cotton  Manufactures,  p.  20;  cf.  ibid.,  pp.  28-29). 
Cf.  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Sept.  13,  1881,  interview  with 
Francis  Cogin. 


37 1 ~]  THE   ROLE   OF   CAPITAL  265 

doubt  about  the  improvement  that  took  place — the  plant 
was  enlarged  and  bettered  and  stock  was  increased  in 
value.105 

While  competition  was  slight,  mills  run  in  any  sort  of  way 
made  money.106  Stock  in  South  Carolina  mills  in  1880  was 
worth,  on  the  average,  more  than  125.  Exclusive  of  a 
Clement  Attachment  mill,  where  50  per  cent  was  made, 
profits  ranged  from  18  to  25^2  per  cent.  It  was  said  that 
in  the  next  year  any  ordinary  factory  ought  to  pay  as 
well.107  Demonstrated  fact  encouraged  one  estimate  that 
spinning  mills  in  the  South  at  large  should  make  50  per 
cent.108  In  1882  "authenticated  statistics"  were  declared 
to  show  that  investments  in  Southern  mills  with  good,  bad 
and  indifferent  management  were  receiving  average  divi- 
dends of  22  per  cent.109  It  was  not  unusual  for  mills  in 
these  years  to  make  30  per  cent  to  75  per  cent  profit.110 

105  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  v,  pp.  324-325 ; 
Blackman,  pp.  4-5 ;  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Feb.  23,  April  25, 
1 881 ;  Boston  Journal  of  Commerce,  July  29,  1882 ;  Augusta  Trade 
Review,  Oct.,  1884;  Tracy  I.  Hickman,  int.,  Augusta,  Dec.  29,  1916. 
As  to  profitableness  of  Georgia  and  Alabama  mills  in  the  seventies, 
see  Clark,  ibid.,  vol.  vi,  p.  256;  Berney,  Handbook  of  Alabama,  p. 
271 ;  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Sept.  13,  Aug.  18,  1881. 

106  Benjamin  Gossett,  int.,  Anderson.  When  a  new  superintendent 
took  hold  at  a  North  Carolina  mill  he  found  half  the  looms  idle,  and 
yet  the  plant  was  highly  successful  (William  Entwistle,  int.,  Rock- 
ingham). 

107  Blackman,  leading  article  and  pp.  3,  8,  16,  18. 

108  Daily  Constitution,  Atlanta,  March  18,  1880. 

109  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
June  24.  Clark  says  that  investments  this  year  amounted  to  $10,- 
000,000 ;  this  is  not  surprising  when  it  is  remembered  that  large,  well- 
conducted  corporations  were  paying  dividends  of  17  to  24  per  cent. 

110  Sterling  Graydon,  Charlotte;  William  Entwistle,  Rockingham, 
interviews.  The  Augusta  Factory  made  17  per  cent  in  six  months 
(News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Aug.  18,  1881 ;  cf.  Daily  Constitu- 
tion, Atlanta,  Jan.  6,  1880).  Other  mills  made  from  26  to  29  per 
cent  (Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
June  24,  1882).  Even  mills  in  bad  situations  and  with  poor  equip- 
ment made  large  sums.  A  little  factory  eight  miles  from  the  nearest 
place  and  hauling  over  wretched  roads  paid  25  per  cent  on  the 
investment;  machinery  was  old,  capacity  limited  and  the  mill  ran 
only  278  days  in  the  year.  Yarns  sold  at  23  cents  per  pound  cost 
2.44  cents  to  manufacture,  and  the  demand  could  not  be  nearly  sup- 
plied— the  total  output  might  have  been  sold  to  one  man  (Blackman, 
pp.  11-12). 


266  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE   SOUTH        [372 

If  Vaucluse  was  the  only  mill  established  before  1880 
that  paid  anything  in  the  first  year  of  operation,111  its  record 
was  matched  regularly  after  that  date.  Twenty-four  per 
cent  was  made  the  first  year  by  a  Georgia  mill,  and  a  Spar- 
tanburg company  after  six  months  paid  a  4  per  cent  divi- 
dend and  proposed  to  increase  its  capital  to  $1, 000,000. 112 

Without  following  this  subject  through  remaining  years, 
it  may  be  mentioned  that  1882  was  in  some  respects  not  so 
easy  for  Southern  cotton  manufacturers  as  the  two  years 
previous,113  and  that,  though  experiencing  general  alarm 
and  a  few  disasters  in  1884,  1893  and  1896,  the  industry 
quickly  recovered  from  these  backsets.114  Following  the 
great  activity  of  mill  building  which  began  about  1900, 
Southern  earnings  were  approximating  the  low  averages  of 
New  England  plants  twenty-five  years  earlier.115  With  some 
exceptions,116  mills  did  only  fairly  well  through  the  next 
decade,  and  many  were  in  bad  condition  financially  when 
the  advent  of  the  Great  War  lifted  them  all  into  pros- 
perity. The  liveliest  successes  of  the  eighties  were  re- 
peated and  surpassed.  A  right  new  mill  at  Gastonia  with 
$150,000  capital  after  a  short  period  of  operation  paid  a 
stock  dividend  of  20  per  cent  and  made  $155,000  net  profit 
for  the  year.  Generally,  mills  at  this  place  that  did  not 
make  75  per  cent  were  thought  poorly  managed,  numbers 
made  their  entire  capitalization  in  twelve  months  and.  some 
even  higher.117  Other  localities  throughout  the  South 
found  themselves  hardly  less  blessed ;  with  profits  as  the 

111  Ibid.,  p.  6. 

112  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and  Manufacturers'  Record, 
June  3,  Aug.  26,  1882.  For  notice  of  typical  factories  paying  un- 
evenly but  averaging  about  20  per  cent,  cf .  Blackman,  pp.  10,  13,  15 ; 
Deutsche  Zeitung,  Charleston,  Feb.  28,  1881 ;  News  and  Courier, 
Charleston,  Sept.  7,  1881.  For  some  less  conclusive  references  to 
profits  see  ibid.,  Jan.  25,  Feb.  26,  April  4,  1881. 

113  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Feb.  1,  1883;  A.  B.  Murray, 
int.,  Charleston. 

114  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation,  vol.  vi,  pp.  281,  284-286. 

115  Cf.  Goldsmith,  p.  6. 

116  Murphy,  p.  16;  Law,  pp.  23-24. 

•  117  S.  N.  Boyce  and  J.  Lee  Robinson,  G.  W.  Ragan,  C.  B.  Arm- 
strong, Gastonia,  interviews;  J.  Lee  Robinson,  letter,  Gastonia,  Nov. 
28,  1916. 


373U  THE  ROLE  OF  CAPITAL  267 

incentive,  factories  sprang  up  as  suddenly  and  widely  as  in 
the  Cotton  Mill  Campaign.118 

There  is  a  relation  between  percentage  of  profit  and  size 
of  plant.  The  magnitude  of  mills,  of  a  part,  of  course, 
with  degree  of  concentration  of  investment,  is  an  interest- 
ing subject,  indicating  differences  in  development  of  the 
industry  in  various  States.  It  is  convenient  to  compare 
South  Carolina  and  North  Carolina  in  this  regard.  Fac- 
tories of  the  former  State  tended  to  be  fewer  in  number 
but  greater  in  capacity  than  those  of  the  latter,  and  wove  as 
well  as  spun.  Furthermore,  the  impulse  toward  cotton 
manufacturing  was  felt  later  in  North  than  in  South  Caro- 
lina. Several  reasons  may  be  assigned  for  these  facts.  The 
considerable  capital  of  Charleston,  as  it  had  earlier  been 
largely  responsible  for  Graniteville  and  Langley,  later 
played  the  leading  part  in  the  founding  of  such  mills  as 
Piedmont  and  Pelzer.  These  big  weaving  mills  set  a  stand- 
ard; also,  as  has  been  noticed,  Charleston  money  was  a  re- 
source to  South  Carolina  local  communities  pretty  generally. 
North  Carolina  bad  no  city  the  size  of  Charleston;  Wil- 
mington was  not  so  good  a  port  and  did  not  possess  so 
much  capital  available  for  investment.  Little  neighbor- 
hoods were  shut  up  to  their  own  initiative  and  means. 
Moreover,  there  had  always  been  less  social  unity  in  North 
Carolina;  with  much  Scotch  blood,  the  people  were  indi- 
vidualists. Most  of  the  time  small  merchants  had  to  be 
mill  projectors,  and  this  was1  agreeable,  too,  because  per- 
sonal control  over  modest  units  was  preferred  to  a  pool- 
ing of  resources  in  the  hands  of  an  important  capitalist. 
These  things  explain,  also,  why  the  development  commenced 
later  in  North  Carolina.  More  people  had  to  be  converted 
than  in  a  State  where  a  few  could  set  a  powerful  example. 
Even  where  North  Carolina  had  weaving  mills,  these  were 
generally  smaller  than  those  of  South  Carolina.  It  is  to  be 
observed  that  whereas  the  principal  mill  mergers  of  South 

118  W.  J.  Thackston,  int.,  Greenville ;  Literary  Digest,  N.  Y.,  Dec.  9, 
1916 ;  cf .  files  of  all  trade  papers,  especially  Manufacturers'  Record, 
Baltimore. 


268 


THE   RISE    OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        ^374 


Carolina  showed  concentration  of  management,  in  the  out- 
standing case  in  North  Carolina  constituent  mills  remained 
semi-autonomous.  When  a  tradition  was  established,  it 
tended  to  maintain  itself.119 

With  local  capital  in  greater  supply  in  South  Carolina, 
commission  and  machinery  firms  were  more  interested  and 
engineers  were  more  regularly  engaged,  so  large  plants 
were  encouraged.  In  undertaking  the  development  of 
power  and  manufacturing  at  Columbia,  it  was  pointed  out 
by  engineers  that  a  16,000-spindle  mill  would  cost  $27  per 
spindle  and  yield  17  per  cent  profit;  plant  cost  would  be 
proportionately  less  if  equipment  was  20,000  spindles  and 
the  complement  of  looms,  and  earnings  should  be  21  per 
cent;  26,000  spindles  ought  to  bring  earnings  of  25  per 
cent.120 

Later,  a  conscious,  concerted  movement  toward  mills, 
lifting  spindleage  above  the  30,000  point,  in  which  North 
Carolina  patterned  after  South  Carolina,  was  typified  in  the 
erection  of  the  great  Olympia  plant  at  Columbia.  The 
animating  spirit  was  evidenced  by  a  speaker  before  cotton 
manufacturers  in  1903 :  "  I  believe  thoroughly  in  organiza- 
tions of  such  magnitude  that  will  justify  the  employment  of 
the  very  best  skill  to  be  obtained  in  systematic  manage- 
ment." There  was  much  to  be  saved  in  purchase  of  sup- 
plies and  materials.  "A  weakly  fitted  up  mill  under  poor 
management  is  worthless;  the  same  mill  under  good  man- 
agement is  even  then  sadly  handicapped."    But  merger  with 

119  David  Clark,  Hudson  Millar,  Charlotte ;  E.  A.  Smyth,  Green- 
ville ;   Charles  E.  Johnson,  Raleigh ;  W.  K.  Boyd,  Durham,  N.  C,  Sept. 

18,  1916;  J.  A.  Chapman,  Spartanburg;  J.  H.  M.  Beatty,  Columbia, 
interviews.  Georgia  was  much  like  South  Carolina.  Speaking  of  the 
limitations  of  North  Carolina,  it  was  said :  "  Our  people  hadn't  the 
money;  they  all  had  to  scratch  to  get  anything  to  put  into  cotton 
mills,  and  then  it  wasn't  much"  (W.  R.  Odell,  int.,  Concord). 

120  News  and   Courier,   Charleston,   April   13,    1881 ;   cf.   Law,   p. 

19.  As  early  as  1883  South  Carolina  had  several  mills  which  would 
be  ranked  as  large  even  today — four  companies  with  capitalization 
of  half  a  million  or  more,  with  others  of  size  (cf.  Manufacturers' 
Record,  Baltimore,  Jan.  18,  1883).  There  were,  of  course,  mills  as 
small  as  any  in  North  Carolina,  but  these  dated  from  previous  years 
(cf.  as  to  Valley  Falls  and  Reedy  River,  the  former  of  only  $5000 
capital,  Blackman,  pp.  11,  13). 


37 S2  THE  ROLE  OF  CAPITAL  269 

other  plants  would  bring  increased  financial  facilities.  "  The 
tendency  to  concentrate  and  build  mills  with  a  larger  num- 
ber of  spindles  than  formerly  is  a  move  in  the  right  direc- 
tion."121 But  it  was  soon  learned  that  very  large  separate 
mills  and  close  mergers  of  several  plants  were  of  uncertain 
success,  disadvantages  more  than  offsetting  advantages.122 
Small,  isolated  plants  bought  local  cotton  at  a  saving  and 
paid  no  higher  commissions  on  product;  some  could  burn 
wood;  operatives  were  few  and  individually  known;  a  su- 
perintendent could  be  developed  from  the  working  force 
and  did  well  enough  on  a  limited  number  of  standard 
yarns;  living  in  a  small  place  was  cheaper.123     Time  has 

121 "  The  record  of  the  past  three  years  shows  a  large  number  of 
plants  erected  in  the  South  of  from  25,000  spindles  up  to  that  grand 
specimen  of  push  and  enterprise — the  Olympia  Mills — which  has 
104,000  spindles  in  one  mill  and  all  in  one  room"  (see  Southern  Cot- 
ton Spinners'  Assn.,  proceed.  7th  Annual  Convention,  address  of  E. 
W.  Thomas,  p.  149  ff.).  Cf.  Clark,  in  South  in  Building  of  Nation, 
vol.  vi,  pp.  287-288.  Greenville  had  the  example  of  the  success  of 
such  large  mills  as  Pelzer  as  contrasted  with  the  smaller  Huguenot 
and  Camperdown  factories ;  there  was  the  strong  impression  that 
individual  mills  of  limited  size  were  not  easily  financed  (Clement  F. 
Haynsworth,  int.,  Greenville).  "The  Loray  Mill  in  Gastonia  was 
built  about  the  same  time  as  Olympia;  small  mills  had  succeeded,  and 
they  thought  big  ones  would  succeed  even  better"  (S.  N.  Boyce 
and  J.  Lee  Robinson,  int.,  Gastonia). 

122 "  Attention  is  being  paid  to  the  danger  of  having  too  large 
units,  the  prevailing  opinion  in  the  South  being  that  no  special  econo- 
mies from  increased  size  are  obtainable  after  say  50,000  to  60,000  are 
reached.  A  notable  disaster  to  stockholders  and  near-disaster  to 
creditors  in  recent  years  has  taught  the  lesson  that  an  unwieldy 
combination  of  plants  scattered  geographically  has  no  advantage, 
through  concentration  of  purchasing  or  selling,  that  can  possibly 
offset  the  diminution  of  the  personal  equation  in  relations  with  em- 
ployees or  scrutiny  of  details,  usually  given  by  the  executive  in 
charge  of  smaller  units"  (Law,  p.  19;  cf.  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill, 
Commercial  Features,  p.  55).  The  promoter  of  the  chief  amalgama- 
tion in  South  Carolina  believed  he  would  save  in  overhead  expense; 
the  main  benefit  was  in  financing,  for  much  money  was  offered  at 
3  per  cent  when  the  merger  went  together,  whereas  the  individual 
mills  had  never  borrowed  at  less  than  5  per  cent.  Any  other  savings 
were  more  than  counterbalanced  by  expensively  lax  supervision. 
Failure  resulted  (J.  H.  M.  Beatty,  int.,  Columbia).  In  the  principal 
North  Carolina  chain,  while  ownership  is  virtually  identical,  each 
mill  has  its  own  directors  and  must  stand  on  its  own  bottom  finan- 
cially. Some  economies  of  combination  are  deliberately  sacrificed  to 
maintain  efficiency  of  superintendence  (James  W.  Cannon,  int., 
Concord). 

123  cf #  Thompson,  p.  90  ff. 


270  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE    SOUTH        £376 

taken  away  some  of  these  benefits,  but  the  best  present 
opinion  is  that  well  situated  units  of  about  10,000  spindles 
are  most  economical.12* 

There  was  little  buying  and  selling  of  mill  stocks  in  the 
first  part  of  the  period,  and  for  several  reasons.  Factories 
were  so  often  looked  upon  as  family  affairs,  part  and  parcel 
of  the  communities  which  established  them.  Local  sub- 
scribers, small  and  large,  put  in  their  money  as  an  invest- 
ment, and  most  of  those  who  could  purchase  shares  did  so 
at  first.  Mills  were  successful,  moreover,  and  brought  divi- 
dends. To  outsiders  the  industry  was  an  experiment ;  pri- 
vate investors  were  not  attracted.  There  were  few  agencies 
in  the  South  for  handling  the  securities.  Consequently, 
notices  of  value  of  stocks  usually  meant  really  book  value.125 

It  has  been  seen  that  in  1880  the  shares  of  South  Caro- 
lina mills  were  reported  as  being  worth  on  the  average  $125. 
Three  years  later  all  were  above  par  except  five,  which  were 
at  par;  Langley  was  highest,  selling  at  $I73.126  The  stock 
of  the  Wesson  mill  in  Mississippi,  paying  26  per  cent  divi- 
dends, stood  at  more  than  300.127  Shares  in  the  Merrimack 
mills,  in  Alabama,  par  value  $1000,  sold  for  $i620.128 

124  Building  since  1914  has  shown  this.  "  I  had  rather  run  four 
mills  of  10,000  spindles  each  than  one  of  40,000  spindles"  (C.  B. 
Armstrong,  int.,  Gastonia).  This  would  have  to  be  modified  some 
in  the  case  of  cloth  mills. 

125  "  The  stock  of  the  company  sold  for  $63  a  share  in  1867,  and 
now  is  quoted  at  $123.  Even  this  figure  is  not  a  fair  estimate  of 
what  it  is  worth  because  nobody  wants  to  sell.  I  could  go  in  the 
market  tomorrow  and  run  it  up  to  $130,  or  even  $150,  just  by  offer- 
ing that  for  it.  This  is  not  what  we  want,  however"  (Hickman,  of 
Graniteville,  quoted  in  Blackman  (1880),  p.  4.  A  Rockingham  mill 
has  been  owned  by  the  same  stockholders  for  the  forty  years  since 
its  establishment  (Charlotte  News,  Textile  Ed.,  1917,  as  to  Roberdell 
Mill  No.  1).  Stock  in  the  first  mill  at  Salisbury  could  not  be 
bought;  60  per  cent  of  it  was  owned  by  women  who  received  it  by 
inheritance  (O.  D.  Davis,  int.,  Salisbury).  Where  there  was  a  mar- 
ket at  the  opening  of  the  period  it  was  local,  mills  taking  charge  of 
their  own  sales  (Tracy  I.  Hickman,  Augusta;  William  Entwistle, 
Rockingham,  interviews). 

126  Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  Jan.  18,  1883.  The  stock 
of  Graniteville  and  Vaucluse  had  climbed  to  170.  For  similar  facts 
as  to  Augusta  factories,  cf.  Baltimore  Journal  of  Commerce  and 
Manufacturers'  Record,  Sept.  2,  1882;  News  and  Observer,  Raleigh, 
Nov.  16,  1880. 

127  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Jan.  14,  1882. 

128  Observer,  Raleigh,  Aug.  26,  1880. 


377]  THE  ROLE  OF  CAPITAL  27 1 

Besides  the  usual  causes,  Southern  mill  stocks  have 
varied  in  value  because  the  business  was  subject  to  sharp 
fluctuations,  companies  were  irregular  in  providing  surplus 
to  insure  constant  dividends  and  in  offsetting  deprecia- 
tion,129 skill  in  management  was  so  largely  hit-or-miss,  com- 
mission firms  sometimes  interfered  hurtfully  and,  as  will  be 
remarked,  machinery  makers  dumped  their  shares  in  large 
blocks.  Pacolet  once  had  to  alter  its  product  and  so  its  ma- 
chinery; preferred  stock  was  issued  and  common  fell  from 
300  to  below  par.130  Within  two  years  after  a  commission 
firm  had  gained  control  of  a  South  Carolina  mill  following 
a  fight  with  local  stockholders,  shares  that  had  been  at  175 
dropped  to  par.131 

An  active  market  for  the  stocks  developed  in  Charleston 
about  1890  and  in  the  up-country  somewhat  later.  A  good 
many  brokers  made  a  specialty  of  these  securities.  The 
business  was  assisted  by  machinery  builders  disposing  of 
their  holdings  at  concessions.  One  firm  handled  in  one 
year  about  $2,000,000  worth  of  securities  thus  thrown  on 
the  market.132  Charlestonians  had  been  heavy  subscribers 
to  new  ventures  in  the  State,  but  about  1900  stopped  be- 
cause they  could  buy  at  less  than  par.133 

The  financial  history  of  Southern  mills  has  exhibited 
physical  differentials  becoming  less  and  less  important,  and 
skill  in  management  becoming  more  and  more  important. 
Atkinson's  admonition  that  success  in  cotton  manufacture 
meant  a  small  margin  of  profit  on  a  large  capital  was,  after 

129  Qf.  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  p.  85. 

130  A.  N.  Wood,  int.,  Gaffney.  Stock  in  Graniteville  and  mills  at 
Augusta,  which  earlier  led  the  field,  went  far  below  par  (Tracy  I. 
Hickman,  int.,  Augusta). 

131  VV.  W.  Ball,  int.,  Columbia,  Jan.  3,  1917. 

132  w.  J.  Thackston,  letter,  Greenville.  When  machinery  manu- 
facturers were  taking  part  payment  in  stock,  equipment  was  in  great 
demand  and  high  in  price.  Makers  could  therefore  sell  their  shares 
quickly  at  50  cents  on  the  dollar  and  still  make  money  (Washington 
Clark,  int.,  Columbia).  Commission  men,  retaining  their  shares, 
sometimes  made  money ;  a  firm  that  took  stock  when  it  received  the 
agency  of  a  mill  and  offered  to  sell  at  50  later  succeeded  in  selling 
at  300  (Walter  Montgomery,  int.,  Spartanburg,  S.  C,  Sept.  5,  1916). 

133  W.  W.  Ball,  int.,  Columbia,  Jan.  3,  1917. 


272  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        [378 

all,  of  only  delayed  applicability  in  the  new  industry.134  At 
the  opening  of  the  period,  as  has  been  seen,  "they  didn't 
run  mills,  but  just  put  them  up  and  they  made  money. 
Long  hours  of  labor  and  low  wages  made  the  difference 
between  that  time  and  this.  But  old  superiorities  have 
passed.  Mills  that  stayed  in  the  old  rut  went  to  the  wall. 
It  is  necessary  to  operate  mills  in  the  South  today."135 
Management  of  investments  in  land  and  negroes  was  not 
the  best  equipment  for  industrial  control.  As  the  South 
had  grown  a  staple  commodity,  raw  cotton,  and  grew  too 
much  of  it,  so  it  manufactured  staple  cotton  goods,  follow- 
ing the  impulse  mechanically.136  Inexperienced  men  found- 
ing the  industry  in  1880  made  money;  the  same  type  enter- 
ing the  business  twenty  years  later,  as  at  Bessemer  City, 
found  they  could  not  exist.137  By  this  time,  in  the  same 
mill  in  which  average  management  would  yield  10  per  cent 
profit,  superior  management  might  bring  25  per  cent  and 
inferior  operation  a  loss  of  5  per  cent.138  The  margin  be- 
tween the  price  of  middling  cotton  and  of  print  cloth  made 
from  it  between  1881  and  1910  worked  down,  though  not 
without  great  irregularity,  from  108.52  to  S9-24-13&     And 

134  Cf.  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  Dec.  5, 1881,  and  the  writer's 
"  Factors  in  Future  of  Cotton  Manufacture,"  in  Manufacturers' 
Record,  Baltimore,  May  10,  1917. 

135  \y_  j.  Britton,  int.,  Spartanburg.  Social  position  and  good 
intent  too  often  had  to  serve  in  place  of  industrial  ability,  though 
after  1880  there  were  few  instances  approaching  an  episode  during 
the  Civil  War,  when,  at  reorganization  of  an  Augusta  mill,  a  gover- 
nor was  given  $100,000  in  stock  for  his  influence  as  a  director 
(Charles  Estes,  int.,  Augusta).  Often  general  capability,  disregarding 
accustomed  financial  methods  of  corporate  undertakings,  succeeded 
through  sheer  force,  but  in  other  cases  a  slump  in  the  business  would 
take  enterprises  out  of  the  hands  of  the  original  management 
(Chronicle,  Augusta,  Jan.  28,  1886;  Henry  E.  Litchford,  int.,  Rich- 
mond, Aug.  29,  1916). 

136  Landon  A.  Thomas,  int.,  Augusta.  Initiative  in  the  trend 
toward  closely  supervised  plants  making  specialty  products,  already 
appearing,  is  fundamentally  a  problem  of  the  common  school,  awak- 
ening public  intelligence.  Cf.  Georgia  Industrial  Assn.,  proceed.  4th 
Annual  Convention,  pp.  46-47. 

137  S.  N.  Boyce  and  J.  Lee  Robinson,  G.  W.  Ragan,  Gastonia, 
interviews. 

138  Tompkins,  Cotton  Mill,  Commercial  Features,  p.  173. 

139  Copeland,  appendix,  p.  394. 


379]  THE  ROLE  OF  CAPITAL  273 

training  gained  in  manufacturing  has  made  apparent  a  lack 
of  development  of  commercial  attributes  which  are  as  nec- 
essary a  part  of  the  mill  man's  equipment.140  There  has 
been  a  gradual  evolution  from  first  projectors,  who  were 
really  transplanted  slaveholders,  through  a  somewhat  later 
group  composed  of  business  and  professional  men,  to  the 
newer  type  of  manufacturers  who  conceive  it  their  work  to 
make  money  on  fabricated  product  and  not  in  speculation 
on  raw  cotton  or  any  other  gamble,  who  are  not  afraid  of 
competition  with  New  England  and  the  world,  who  relish 
technical  information  and  know  they  had  better  manage  a 
few  plants  well  than  many  poorly.141 

A  qualified  observer  has  said  that  in  the  Southern  indus- 
try the  total  losses  on  an  investment  of  $100,000,000  have 
not  amounted  to  20  per  cent,  and  that  this  is  remarkable 
when  it  is  remembered  how  few  managers  began  with 
knowledge  of  the  business.142 

Gregg  assigned  five  main  causes  of  failure  of  mills  in 
South  Carolina  in  his  day.  These  were  injudicious  selec- 
tion of  machinery  and  character  of  goods  to  be  made,  lack 
of  steady  and  cheap  motive  power,  poor  location,  lack  of 
moral  training  of  operatives,  and  want  of  sufficient  capi- 
tal.143   The  first  and  last  of  these  reasons  are  the  only  ones 

140  See  Georgia  Industrial  Assn.,  proceed.  4th  Annual  Convention, 
address  of  J.  J.  Spalding,  pp.  46-47. 

141  Cf.  the  writer's  "  Factors  in  Future  of  Cotton  Manufacture,"  in 
Manufacturers'  Record,  Baltimore,  May  10,  1917;  Tompkins,  Cotton 
Mill,  Commercial  Features,  pp.  30  ff.,  63 ;  Plan  to  Raise  Capital,  p. 
18;  J.  H.  M.  Beatty,  Columbia,  Jan.  3,  1917;  Landon  A.  Thomas, 
Augusta;  Joseph  H.  Separk,  Gastonia,  interviews.  It  is  true  that 
in  this  process  young  men  technically  trained  have  not  yet  made 
themselves  available  for  large  leadership,  so  that  others  without 
their  advantages  are  still  called  upon  (W.  W.  Ball,  int.,  Columbia, 
Jan.  3,  1917). 

142  W.  J.  Thackston,  int.,  Greenville;  cf.  Law,  p.  18.  There  is 
some  truth  in  a  statement  that  as  a  rule  the  local  investor  has  not 
made  much  on  dividends,  but  has  received,  with  everybody,  a  large 
indirect,  social  benefit  from  the  establishment  of  the  industry  (M.  L. 
Bonham,  int.,  Anderson).  Small  local  shareholders,  if  dividends  did 
not  begin  promptly,  sometimes  sold,  very  often  to  the  mill  promoter 
(J.  W.  Norwood,  int.,  Greenville). 

143  Quoted  in  Kohn,  Cotton  Mills  of  S.  C,  p.  18. 
18 


274  THE   RISE   OF   COTTON    MILLS   IN    THE   SOUTH        {j80 

that  may  be  said  to  have  held  in  the  later  period.144  Mis- 
fortunes following  untrained  management  were  not  men- 
tioned by  Gregg,  probably  because  he  could  not  foresee 
competitive  conditions  that  were  to  come. 

It  has  'been  remarked  that  a  good  many  mills  were  sold 
just  prior  to  the  opening  of  the  Cotton  Mill  Campaign. 
Some  of  these  were  old  factories  that  had  been  run  down, 
or  their  owners  had  died ;  either  they  failed,  or  were  bought 
up  when  the  industry  was  receiving  renovation  and  there 
was  a  demand  for  plants  that  could  be  improved.145  The 
mills  sold  in  the  eighties  were  decidedly  exceptions.148 
However,  1884  saw  losses  and  partial  shut-downs  while 
debts  accumulated.  Graniteville  went  backward  for  the 
first  time  in  seventeen  years.  Recovery  in  special  cases  was 
the  slower  because  mills  were  just  launching  out.147 

Surrounded  by  cotton,  the  price  of  the  raw  material  play- 
ing so  large  a  part  in  coarse  goods  manufacture,  and  hav- 
ing some  capital  at  their  disposal,  the  temptation  for  mill 
executives  to  speculate  in  the  staple  has  been  an  evil.  Two 
men  worked  together  in  promoting  manufactures  at  Gas- 
tonia;  one  was  content  to  make  or  lose  as  a  spinner,  and 
succeeded,  while  the  other  after  a  time  counted  too  heavily 
•on  his  skill  in  manipulation  of  cotton  deals  and  met  with 
-disaster.  About  1900  the  stock  of  an  excellent  South  Caro- 
lina mill  went  to  150,  and  the  promoter  erected  a  second 
large  plant.  With  good  credit,  mill  president  and  town 
"were  ruined  in  two  years ;  he  gambled  in  cotton  and  the 

144  Old  machinery  was  always  a  bad  bargain,  but  when  it  was 
bought  the  mills  were  making  money  and  soon  could  scrap  this 
equipment  and  profit  by  the  experience ;  standard  goods  were  manu- 
factured and,  as  will  be  noticed  presently,  losses  on  these  were  be- 
cause of  sudden  change  in  the  market  rather  than  through  mistaken 
choice  of  product. 

145  Cf.  Blackman,  p.  12. 

146  Cf .  Savannah  Morning  News,  July  7,  1882.  The  Charleston 
factory  changed  hands  at  a  loss  totalling  $499,000  (Bird  Memoranda). 

147  Cf.  Chronicle,  Augusta,  May  28,  July  29,  1884;  Jan.  29,  April 
23,  1885 ;  Jan.  28,  March  10,  1886,  and  other  clippings  arranged  in 
the  Raworth  Scrapbook;  there  are  printed  reports  of  the  president 
of  the  Sibley  mill  dated  April  28,  1886,  and  Oct.  23,  1888. 


$Sl"]  THE  ROLE  OF  CAPITAL  275 

market  went  against  him.148  A  sympathetic  'critic  of  the 
Southern  industry  has  said  that  "  The  principal  occasion  of 
financial  disaster  .  .  .  has  been  that  of  speculation.  It  is 
true  that  in  some  instances  this  has  been  merely  the  final 
plunge  of  desperate  unsuccessful  management.  In  other 
cases,  however,  both  directors  and  stockholders  have  known 
that  earnings  greater  than  possible  from  legitimate  manu- 
facturing were  being  shown.  They  winked  at  the  excessive 
profits  and  deserved  little  sympathy  when  they  sustained 
losses."149 

There  has  been  little  fraud  on  the  part  of  mill  men.  In 
the  beginning  there  could  scarcely  have  been  any,  so  inti- 
mately were  communities  acquainted  with  the  enterprises.15* 
The  scandal  in  the  great  Parker  merger  recently  has  been 
the  conspicuous  exception ;  the  experience  did  much  to  turn 
favor  away  from  closely  centralized  financial  control.  This 
failure  was  a  moral  blow  not  only  to  the  industry,  but  to 
the  section.151 

Another  cause  of  failure  has  been  payment  of  too  high 
salaries,  with  extension  of  plant  to  niake  these  seem  plaus- 
ible. Also,  superintendents  have  been  accused  of  receiving 
commissions  on  machinery  and  supplies  bought  by  them.152 

148  Cf .  Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  1916,  respecting  Union  and 
Buffalo  mills. 

149  Law,  p.  21  ff.  "  Profits  thus  obtained  are  absolutely  demoraliz- 
ing to  efficiency  in  management  or  the  working  out  of  small  econo- 
mies— the  legitimate  source  of  success — and  are  hurtful  to  the 
general  industry,  in  that  they  create  fictitious  costs,  apparently  justi- 
fying sales  of  product  at  really  destructive  prices.  .  .  .  My  belief  is 
that  the  cotton  manufacturer  who  now  indulges  in  such  speculation 
is  the  exception."  There  have  been  examples  of  what  might  be 
called  speculation  in  finished  product,  too.  A  gingham  mill  at  Rock 
Hill  had  been  operating  successfully;  the  market  dropped,  but  pros- 
pects were  thought  to  be  good  and  cloth  was  stored  in  warehouses 
until  it  represented  a  value  greater  than  the  capitalization  of  the 
company.  The  style  in  ginghams  changed,  and  the  plant  had  to  be 
sold  (cf.  Columbia  Record,  Textile  Ed.,  1916). 

150  There  seems  to  have  been  allegation  of  fraud  in  the  case  of 
the  small  Fork  Shoals  factory  in  1881.  This  was  an  old  and  isolated 
mill  (cf.  News  and  Courier,  Charleston,  April  23). 

151 W.  J.  Thackston,  int.,  Greenville. 

152  Charles  Estes,  int.,  Augusta.  In  the  case  of  one  Augusta  mill, 
it  is  alleged,  the  president  did  not  inspect  matters  narrowly;  the 


2^6  THE   RISE   OF    COTTON    MILLS   IN   THE    SOUTH         [382 

Extensions  involving  debt,  especially  from  the  nineties 
forward,  were  a  source  of  misfortune.  The  Gaffney  mill 
after  three  profitable  first  years  built  a  warranted  addition, 
but  then  followed  a  big  new  plant  and  a  finishing  mill  that 
saddled  the  company  with  obligations  under  which  it  could 
not  succeed,  business  being  depressed.153 

Coleman's  mill  at  Concord,  not  unnaturally  for  a  first 
enterprise  by  negroes,  was  badly  managed  and  became  in 
debt  to  local  capitalists,  who  foreclosed.154  Everyone  had 
been  willing  to  lend  to  the  reliable  Graniteville  mill  with- 
out anxiety  as  to  payment  of  principal,  until  suddenly  cred- 
itors became  solicitous  for  their  money,  precipitating  reor- 
ganization of  the  company  in  191 5. 

Though  there  is  complaint  that  too  many  mills  were  built 
in  a  short  period,  so  that  profits  fell  away,155  it  may  be 
concluded  that  where  enterprises  have  not  succeeded  their 
difficulties  have  been  due  to  untrained  management  and 
lack  of  capital  rather  than  to  untoward  conditions  or  lim- 
ited opportunities  in  the  industry.156 

superintendent  would  send  certified  bills  to  him  and  he  would  make 
out  New  York  checks  for  the  amounts,  the  superintendent  getting 
his  benefit  from  such  payments. 

153  L.  Baker,  int.,  Gaffney.  The  Laurens  mill  borrowed  $150,000 
to  give  the  plant  30,000  spindles  and  other  enlargements  ensued  and 
contributed  to  embarrassments  of  the  company  later.  Whaley  in' 
Columbia  built  the  little  Richland  mill  and  then  Granby,  and  both 
did  well.  Then  he  proposed  to  build  the  greatest  mill  on  earth 
under  one  roof,  and  exhausted  the  credit  of  his  previous  factories 
(W.  W.  Ball,  int.,  Columbia,  Jan.  3,  1917).  "Many  mills  were  built 
with  a  debt  of  $10  per  spindle  [the  average  cost  being  about  $20], 
believing  they  could  pay  up  in  a  few  years  at  the  high  earnings  of 
$4  or  $5  per  spindle.  Many  of  these  were  caught  with  big  debts  and 
declining  earnings"   (Summerfield  Baldwin,  Jr.,  int.,  Baltimore). 

154  Charles  McDonald,  int.,  Charlotte. 

155  James  D.  Hammett,  Anderson ;  Mrs.  M.  P.  Gridley,  Greenville, 
interviews. 

156  Julius  Koester,  H.  R.  Buist,  Charleston ;  Thomas  Purse,  Sa- 
vannah ;  August  Kohn,  Columbia,  interviews. 


INDEX 


Agriculture,  exclusive  devotion 
to,  vii;  character  of,  in  ante- 
bellum South,  30  (note) ;  use 
of  primitive  methods  in,  27; 
indications  of  revival  of,  in 
N.  C,  73,  81 ;  improvement  in, 
86-87;  at  low  ebb  in  seventies, 
144-146;  closely  joined  with 
industry,  173  ff.,  depressed 
condition   of,    173-176. 

Atkinson,  Edward,  his  views  on 
proximity  to  raw  material, 
64-65 ;  on  preparation  of  cot- 
ton, 65 ;  significance  of  Atlanta 
speech,  75  and  note;  his  char- 
acter, purposes  and  influence, 
117  ff. ;  attitude  of  South  to- 
ward, 237,  238. 

Baker,  L.,  quoted,  101  (note)  ; 
his  leadership  at  Gaffney,  S. 
C,    128-129. 

Banks,  unimportant  participa- 
tion of,  249,  260-261. 

Bonds,  258-260. 

Borrowing.  See  Capital  and 
Commission    Houses. 

Brown,   W.   G.,  quoted,   vii. 

Capital,  availability  of,  to  ante- 
bellum South,  23,  24;  in 
Southern  industry  1850-60, 
44;  home,  to  be  drawn  upon, 
83 ;  investments  as  result  of 
Atlanta  Exposition,  124  and 
note;  English,  negligible,  149- 
150;  would  come  with  immi- 
Igration,  205 ;  investment  off 
local,  232-237;  attitude  toward 
outside,  237-241 ;  investment 
by  machinery  makers  and 
commission  firms,  241  ff. ;  lack 
of  working.  248  ff . ;  of  Charles- 
ton, 267;  borrowing,  261  and 
note,  267  (note). 

Charleston,  S.  C,  ordinance  of, 
against   use   of   steam    engine, 


33  and  note;  neglect  of  State 
industry  by,  37-38;  changed 
spirit'  of,  81-82  and  note,  111; 
concern  of,  for  public  welfare, 
127;  scarcity  of  operatives  in, 
193-196;  negro  operatives  in, 
216-218;  capital  of,  267. 

Charleston  Manufacturing  Com- 
pany, organization  of,  71 ; 
reasons  for  inception  of,  97, 
127,  132,  133-134.  157;  labor 
troubles  of,  193-196;  negro 
operatives  in  old  plant  of, 
216-218. 

Child  labor,  necessary  and 
natural  at  first,  95. 

Civil  War,  not  a  fortuitous 
event,  43 ;  as  block  to 
declared  industrial  beginnings, 
46  (note)  ;  lack  of  manufac- 
tures to  assist  in,  53 ;  opened 
door  to  Southern  upbuilding, 
53-55.  85. 

Clark,  V.  S.,  his  views  on  period 
1840-60,  22-26;  on  whole  ante- 
bellum  period,   41-43- 

Clay,  C.  M.,  on  slavery  as  cause 
of  Southern  inaction,  51 
(note). 

Clement  Attachment,  74,  154. 
263. 

Climate,  modified  by  humidi- 
fiers, 67  (note). 

Coleman,    Warren,    215-216. 

Columbia,  S.  C,  peculiar  sufferer 
in  Civil  War,  83  (note),  128 
(note);  canal  project  at,  128; 
advantage  of  location  at,  224; 
self-help  in,  234. 

Commission  Houses,  participa- 
tion of,  241  ff. ;  as  lenders  of 
working  capital,  248  ff; 
"Plaid  Trust,"   256    (note). 

Copeland,  M.  T.,  on  location  of 
mills,  184-185;  on  negro  op- 
eratives, 220  (note). 


277 


278 


INDEX 


[384 


Cotton,  course  of  price  of,  be- 
fore Civil  War,  28  (note) ; 
increase  in  acreage  in  fifties, 
49-So;  increased  production 
of,  after  Civil  War,  75;  low 
price  of,  stimulated  manufac- 
tures, 144-146;  an  early  view 
of  benefits  of,  161-162  (note). 
See   Agriculture. 

Cotton  Gin,  effect  of,  upon  price 
of  staple,  10;  cotton  mill  on 
on  site  of,  14-15  (note)  ;  re- 
sponsible for  slavery,  28. 

Cotton  Mills,  ante-bellum  ("Old 
Mills")  antecedent  in  time  but 
not  necessarily  in  effect,  15- 
16;  character  of,  16-22;  sta- 
tus of,  in  1840  and  1850,  21 ; 
V.  S.  Clark  on  those  of  1840- 
60,  22-26;  evidences  of  rise  of, 
in  South,  59  ff. ;  anticipated, 
not  accidental,  78-79,  84-85; 
reasons  for  rise  of,  96  ff . ;  rise 
of,  was  through  Southern  ef- 
fort, 102. 

"Cotton  Mill  Campaign,"  1880 
as  date  of  commencement'  of, 
59  ff.;  its  character,  151  ff. 

Dawson,  F.  W.,  his  character 
and  service,   113-114. 

DeBow,  J.  D.  B.,  a  representa- 
tive of  minority  opinion,  56. 

Dividends,  261  ff. 

Edmonds,  R.  H.,  on  ante-bellum 
industrialism,    43-47. 

Enterprisers,  from  old  aristo- 
cracy, 47-48,  55-56;  doers,  not 
talkers,  78;  social  exponents, 
101  ff . ;  ex-Confederates  as, 
102-105 ;  cotton  factors  as, 
105-106;  merchants  as,  106- 
108;  Northern,  welcomed,  111- 
112;  as  stimulated  by  town 
pride,  128-131 ;  some  who 
learned  by  example,  142;  in- 
clined toward  individualism  in 
N.  C,  267-268;  evolution  in 
type  of,  271-273. 

Estes,  Charles,  108. 

Failures,    due    to    poor    execu- 
tives,   108    (note) ;    273    ff. 
Finishing,  255. 


Gaffney,    S.   C.     See   Baker,   L. 

Garfield,  James  A.,  South  moved 
at  assassination  of,  91-92. 

Gastonia,  N.  C,  G.  A.  Gray's 
influence  at,  109,  no. 

Grady,  H.  W.,  quoted,  77  and 
note,  80;  character  of  his 
thought,  80  (note)  ;  on  obli- 
gations to  South,  94;  advocate 
of  cotton  manufactures,   114. 

Graniteville  Factory,  20  (note), 
23,  142,  169-170,  264-265,  274. 
See  Gregg,  William. 

Gray,  G.  A,  109. 

Gregg,  William,  isolated  advo- 
cate of  manufactures,  26;  on 
results  of  cotton  culture,  28; 
proponent  of  self-sufficiency 
for  S.  C,  33;  against  current 
political  leadership,  36-37;  on 
advantages  of  corporate  in- 
dustrial enterprise,  38-39 
(note)  ;  not  a  social  exponent, 
43;  on  enterprisers,  107-108; 
on  public  benefits  of  mills, 
125-126;  on  poor  whites,  168- 
169;  on  negro  operatives,  210- 
211;  on  causes  of  failures, 
273-274.  See  Graniteville  Fac- 
tory. 

Hammett,  H.  P.,  typical  indus- 
trial leader,  '58-59  (note)  ;  one 
of  pioneers,  71,  109;  his  phil- 
anthropy, 133;  influence  of  his 
Piedmont  Factory,  143 ;  on 
Southern  operatives,  171 ;  on 
negro  operatives,  217;  labor 
in  mill  of,  226. 

Hammond,  J.  H.,  his  elevation 
of  cotton  culture,  48-49. 

Hayes-Tilden  Election,  59,  62; 
as  delay  to  "Real  Reconstruc- 
tion," 88. 

Helper,  H.  R.,  quoted,  15 (note), 
26,  34,  52  (note).   See  slavery. 

Hemphill,  J.  C,  vii. 

Immigration,  kept  out  of  South 
by  slavery,  23-25,  31 ;  progres- 
siveness  of  districts  having 
foreign  traditions,  32;  sought 
by  South,  200  ff. 

Industrialism,  opposition  of 
ante-bellum  leaders  to,  35~37; 


385] 


INDEX 


279 


importance  of  corporate  enter- 
prise to,  38-39;  unhealthy  ad- 
vocacy of,  42,  83-84;  no  real 
movement  toward,  before 
Civil  War,  41-47 ;  precluded  by 
sectionalism,  52;  lack  of,  felt 
during  Civil  War,  53- 

Industrial  Revolution  in  Eng- 
land, contrast  with  that  of 
South,  78-79,  84-85,  86. 

Ingle,  Edward,  criticism  of  ante- 
bellum South,  28  (note) ;  on 
poor  whites,   165. 

International  Cotton  Exposi- 
tion, Edward  Atkinson's  pur- 
pose in,  65;  significance  of,  71- 
73,  120  ff. 

Kohn,  August,  on  share-tenants, 
175  (note)  ;  on  scarcity!  of 
labor,  199  (note)  ;  on  negro 
operatives,  211,  220  (note) ; 
on  family  incomes,  230 
(note)  ;  on  proportion  of 
home-owned  capital,  233 
(note)  ;  on  dividends,  262. 

Labor,  now  differentiated  from 
management,  160-161 ;  char- 
acter of  poor  whites,  161  ff. ; 
efficiency  of,  171-172;  plenti- 
fulness  of,  at  first,  176  ff. ; 
proportions  of  classes  of  op- 
eratives, 180-181 ;  local  sup- 
plies of,  181  ff. ;  floating,  186- 
187;  from  mountains,  189- 
191;  scarcity  of,  191  ff. ;  oppo- 
sition to,  200,  205,  206  (note)  ; 
soliciting  of,  208-209;  slaves  in 
cotton  mills,  209-213 ;  negroes 
in  after-war  factories,  213-221. 
See  "Poor  Whites." 

Law,  J.  A.,  on  extensions  of 
plant,  263  (note)  ;  on  manage- 
ment, 269  (note) ;  on  specu- 
lation, 275  and  note. 

Location,  only  one  mill  within 
corporate  limits  in  1880,  62; 
alleged  superior  advantages  of 
New  England,  64-65 ;  in  re- 
sponse to  social  motive,  129- 
130,  131  (note)  ;  with  respect 
to  labor,  184-187,  209;  infe- 
rior, did  not  prevent  profit, 
265   (note). 

Losses,  273  ff. 


Machinery,  new  in  South,  67; 
cotton  manufacturing  at  At- 
lanta Exposition,  122,  124-125; 
need  for  reequipment  with, 
151;  Southern  demand  for 
Northern,  244-246;  use  of 
second-hand,  245-246,  250 
(note). 

Machinery  Manufacturers,  not' 
speculators  in  South,  150-151 ; 
participation  of,  241  ff. 

Management,  271  ff. 

Manufactures,  dependence  of 
ante-bellum  South  upon  North 
for,  32-35,  97   (note). 

Mechanical  Improvements,  ab- 
sence of,  through  agency  of 
slavery,  27  and  note,  52-53. 

Mitchell,  S.  C,  quoted,  vii-viii; 
on  Southern  economic  states- 
manship, 92  (note)  ;  on  South- 
ern democracy,  126  (note). 

Murphy,  E.  G.,  his  views  on 
Southern  industrial  history, 
46-48;  on  Southern  democ- 
racy, 126  (note)  ;  on  altruism 
of  South,  132  (note). 

Negro,  considered  for  mill  op- 
erative, 25 ;  opposition  to  em- 
ployment of,  27  (note),  200, 
205,  206  (note)  ;  used  in  "  old 
mills,"  170,  209-213;  in  after- 
war  mills,  213-221. 

New  England,  ability  of  South 
to  compete  with,  46;  relative 
advantage  with  South,  64; 
losing  in  percentage  increase 
in  cotton  manufacturing,  66; 
growth  of  special  localities  in, 
stressed,  67,  68;  it's  recognition 
of  Southern  development,  69; 
its  interests  guarded  by  Ed- 
ward Atkinson,  1 18-120;  con- 
trast with  South  respecting 
labor,  180-181,  224,  225 ;  re- 
specting operation,  238-239 ; 
respecting  profits,  262,  264  and 
note. 

"  New  South,"  45-46 ;  it's  her- 
itage from  ante-bellum  South, 
47-48;  constructive,  not  de- 
structive, 80-81 ;  stimulation 
of,  in  Atlanta  Exposition,  123. 


28o 


INDEX 


[386 


News  and  Courier,  as  advocate 
of  cotton  manufacturing,  71, 
82  (note)  ;  112-114.  See  Daw- 
son, F.  W. 

Olmstead,  F.  L.,  on  numbing  ef- 
fect of  slavery,  29  and  note; 
on  poor  whites,  164-165 
(notes). 

Operatives,  from  North  and 
Europe  contemplated,  25,  193, 
199;  social  prejudice  against, 
196-198;  sale  of  stock  to,  261. 

Orr,  J.  L.,  his  acquiescence  in 
result  of  Civil  War,  78;  as 
type  of  ex-Confederate  enter- 
priser,  103. 

Page,  W.  H.,  quoted,  126-127, 
132  (note). 

Piedmont  Factory.  See  Ham- 
mer:,   H.    P. 

Plant,  size  of,  267-270;  exten- 
sion of,  275-276. 

Plunkett,  Horace,  on  Irish  agri- 
culture, 27  (note)  ;  on  Irish 
politics,  30  (note),  51-52 
(notes). 

Politics,  profitless  character  of, 
in  ante-bellum  South,  29-31 ; 
growing  manifestation  of,  in 
commercial  conventions,  50>- 
51 ;  blow  to),  through  Civil 
War,  53-54;  losing  power,  78; 
eschewed,  89-90,  and  91  (note)  ; 
91-94;  took  all  energies  during 
Reconstruction,    98--99. 

"  Poor  Whites,"  effects  upon  of 
cotton  culture.  10;  ignored  as 
possible  operatives,  25,  192; 
concern  for  as  motive  in  mill- 
building,  132  ff. ;  character  of, 
161  ff. ;  their  eagerness  to 
enter  mills,  176-179.  See 
labor. 

Presidential  Election  of  1876. 
See  Hayes-Tilden  Election. 

Presidential  Election  of  1880, 
issue  of,  as  contributing  to 
industrialism   in    South,   88  ff. 

Product,  contributed  to  domestic 
industry,  18-10:  advantage  in 
coarse,  accorded  to  South,  7^, 


138,  139  and  note;  demand 
for,  in  1880,  75 ;  negroes  useful 
only  on  coarse,  217,  221; 
selling  of,  251  ff.  See  Com- 
mission Houses. 

Profits,  growing  certainty  of, 
58;  realize  total  at  home,  84; 
as  motive  to  mill-building, 
115-117,  147-148;  easily  made 
at  first,  130  (note),  263-266: 
better  in  South  than  in  North, 
152  (note)  ;  extensions  of 
plant  from,  257;  of  Southern 
mills,  261  ff. 

Proximity  to  Raw  Material, 
Edward  Atkinson's  views  on, 
64;  as  basis  of  Southern  pro- 
gress, 66;  importance  of,  as 
seen  outside  of  South,  73;  as 
insuring  profits,  115-117;  as 
responsible  for  rise  of  mills, 
137-141,  157  (note). 

Railroads,  William  Gregg's  op- 
position to  subsidy  to,  37;  an- 
ticipated advantage  from,  43 
(note)  ;  renewed  activity  in 
building  of,  74,  87;  and  labor 
supply,  185-187. 

Raworth  Scrapbook,  viii. 

"Real  Reconstruction,"  77  ff. ; 
comprehensiveness  of,  86-88, 
124  (note)  ;  spiritual  and  ma- 
terial promptings  to,  94-95 ; 
newspapers  as  leaders  in.  112 
ff.  See  "Cotton  Mill  Cam- 
paign." 

Reconstruction,  change  of  heart 
of  South  during,  56-58;  lasted 
late  in  S.  C,  62;  progress  pre- 
cluded during.  98-99. 

Revolutionarv  Period,  excellent 
start  of  Southern  manufac- 
tures in,  11-12;  domestic  char- 
acter of  industry  in,  12-14. 

Salisbury,  N.  C.  See  Salisbury 
Cotton  Mills. 

Salisbury  Cotton  Mills,  signifi- 
cance of  inception  of,  134-136. 

Slavery,  partly  responsible  for 
Appomattox,  vii ;  removal  of. 
pqcisfpri  industry,  10.  15 
(note)  ;      hindrance      of,      to 


387] 


INDEX 


28l 


Southern  prosperity,  15 
(note),  23,  25,  26-29;  as  as- 
sistance to  industrial  leaders, 
48;  C.  M.  Clay's  condemnation 
of,  51  (note) ;  abolition  of, 
freed  the  South,  54. 

Slaves,  not  wealth,  44-45. 

Stanwood,  Edward,  his  descrip- 
tion of  South's  progress  in 
cotton   manufacturing,  65-68. 

States '  Rights,  partly  respon- 
sible for  Appomattox,  vii. 

Stock,  sale  of,  by  machinery 
makers,  247  and  note;  addi- 
tional issues  of,  258;  pre- 
ferred, 258-260;  value  of,  265; 
market  for,  270-271. 

Tariff,  as  function  of  cotton, 
40-41. 

Thompson,  Holland,  on  negro 
operatives,  219,  220  (note)  ; 
on  proportion  of  Southern 
capital,  233  (note)  ;  on  work- 
ing capital,  249    (note). 

Tompkins,  D.  A.,  his  interpre- 
tation   of    Southern    economic 


history,  10;  on  results  of 
slavery,  26-27,  28  and  note; 
on  South's  need  for  tariff,  41 ; 
his  significance  as  industrial- 
ist, 109-110;  plainness  of  his 
advocacy  of  manufactures, 
117;  on  negro  operatives,  220 
(note) ;  on  working  capital, 
248;  on  profits,  262-263. 
Transportation,  consequences  of 
lack  of,  in  ante-bellum  South, 
39.    See  Railroads. 

Wages,  half  those  of  North  in 
forties,  169;  as  reflection  of 
economic  conditions,  221-222; 
in  ante-bellum  mills,  222-223; 
in  plants  of  post-1880  period, 
224  ff. ;  variations  in,  226-227, 
228  (note)  ;  significance  of  in- 
creases in,  229-231. 

Watterson,  Henry,  his  charac- 
terization of  Southern  eco- 
nomic history,  26. 

Woodward,  Baldwin  &  Co.,  243- 
244  and  note. 


" 


ttJXw  %J'X^^~'lksu  jtssJX&n  hilt  . 


